Crowdfunding for health research: A global systematic review, qualitative evidence synthesis and TDR pilot for LMIC researchers

Abstract

BackgroundMany exceptional researchers, especially in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) face structural disadvantages in applying for research grants. Public engagement and crowdfunding make it possible for researchers to directly seek support from the public, by engaging large groups of people who make small contributions to support a project. This manuscript synthesizes global qualitative evidence and describes a WHO-TDR public engagement and crowdfunding pilot programme.MethodsWe searched six databases for primary qualitative and mixed-methods research. We used a thematic synthesis approach and assessed our findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. A crowdfunding approach to finance research studies was tested through a pilot programme, with a focus on infectious diseases of poverty. TDR Global mentors provided support for five finalists to engage the public and develop crowdfunding campaigns.ResultsNine studies were included in the qualitative evidence synthesis. Themes were developed into seven key findings, including the need for extensive public engagement, the potential for crowdfunding to open a communication channel between researchers and the public, key correlates of crowdfunding success and the risks of crowdfunding health research with associated mitigation strategies. The TDR pilot programme received 121 entries from 37 countries. Five LMIC-based researchers received training and joined a working group. Three researchers launched their crowdfunding campaigns, met their goals and received substantial monetary and non-monetary contributions.ConclusionPublic engagement provides a foundation for effective crowdfunding for health research. Our evidence synthesis and pilot data provide practical strategies for LMIC researchers to engage the public and conduct crowdfunding campaigns.

Crowdfunding for health research: a qualitative evidence synthesis and a pilot programme

“… 16 We followed the Cochrane handbook for conducting systematic reviews and used the 2020 PRISMA guidance. 17 18 19 …”

“…The purpose of this review was to systematically identify and synthesise evidence on crowdfunding for health research, including barriers, facilitators and implications for policy and practice 16. We followed the Cochrane handbook for conducting systematic reviews and used the 2020 PRISMA guidance 17 18 19…”

Social innovation in health: concepts and practice

“…The SIHI team in the Philippines describes how they were able to institutionalise their social innovation programme through a national level Gelia Castillo Award funded by the government 41. In addition, the SIHI team in China (Social Entrepreneurship to Spur Health, SESH) organised a systematic review of barriers and facilitators of crowdfunding for research in LMICs 42. This complements an SIHI/SESH/TDR practical guide on crowdfunding for research 43…”