Review of the reverse innovation series in globalization and health – where are we and what else is needed?

Harris, Matthew; Dadwal, Viva; Syed, Shamsuzzoha B

doi:10.1186/s12992-020-00555-6

Cited by 19 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Implicit association stemming from cultural arrogance is noted to be a factor hindering uptake in HICs ( Harris et al., 2017 ; Ibe et al., 2018 ). Change-resistant culture is also frequently mentioned as an obstacle ( Cotton et al., 2014 ; Snowdon et al., 2015 ; Tran and Ravaud, 2016 ; Harris et al., 2020 ). Another hindrance to the process of reverse innovation can be systemic factors, such as infrastructural ( Dalton, 2017 ) or bureaucratic inflexibilities ( Snowdon et al., 2015 ), for example, in patenting processes ( Correa, 2004 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This targeted review of published literature is a gap analysis. The broadly heterogeneous nature of the topic of reverse innovation is evidenced by the still ambiguous terminology and the highly different but equally relevant disciplines, including health services research, management science, diffusion of innovation theory, organizational behaviour, cognitive psychology, marketing science, development studies and more ( Harris et al., 2020 ). Although the concept of innovation diffusion is not new, establishing a global shared vocabulary and standardization is slow and continues to evolve ( Sounderajah et al., 2021 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even the term ‘reverse’ is controversial ( Cotton et al., 2014 ; Harris et al., 2016b ; Bhattacharyya et al., 2017 ), as it implies that innovation normally flows unilaterally from high to low-income settings. Perpetuating this colonial perspective, in fact, undermines the shift in knowledge translation that the process should promote ( Skopec et al., 2019 ; Harris et al., 2020 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

From reverse innovation to global innovation in animal health: A review

Crump

Maidane

Mauti

et al. 2021

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reverse innovation refers to learning from or diffusion of innovations developed in low income settings and further translated to industrialized countries. There is lack of consensus regarding terminology, but the idea that innovations in low-income countries are promising for adoption in high-income contexts is not new. However, in healthcare literature globally, the vast majority of publications referring to ‘disruptive innovation’ were published in the last ten years. To assess the potential of innovative developments and technologies for improving animal health, we initiated a literature review in 2020. We used a combined approach, incorporating targeted searching in PubMed using a key word algorithm with a snowball technique, to identify 120 relevant publications and extract data for qualitative coding. Heterogeneity of articles precluded meta-analysis, quality scoring and risk of bias analysis. We can distinguish technical innovations like new digital devices, diagnostic tests and procedures, and social innovations of intersectoral cooperation. We profile two case studies to describe potential global innovations: an integrated surveillance and response system in Somali Regional State, Ethiopia and a blockchain secured One Health intervention to optimally provide post-exposure prophylaxis for rabies exposed people in West Africa. Innovation follows no borders and can also occur in low-income settings, under constraints of cost, lack of services and infrastructure. Lower administrative and legal barriers may contribute to produce innovations that would not be possible under conditions of high density of regulation. We recommend using the term global innovation, which highlights those emanating from international partnership to solve problems of global implications.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

From reverse innovation to global innovation in animal health: A review

Crump

Maidane

Mauti

et al. 2021

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Members of the NA AMPATH partner institutions have come to more fully appreciate the insight and understanding of global health challenges in our own backyards that are gained only through sustained partnership with our Kenyan partners. The shift in emphasis on cultural humility rather than cultural competency [50] is reflected in the trend toward reciprocal innovation-the idea that medical trainees, providers, and researchers can learn from each other no matter their country or culture of origin [47].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing Ethical and Sustainable Global Health Educational Exchanges for Clinical Trainees: Implementation and Lessons Learned from the 30-Year Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare (AMPATH) Partnership

Turissini

Mercer

Baenziger

et al. 2020

Annals of Global Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Short Term Experiences in Global Health (STEGHs) are a popular and well-acknowledged valuable component of medical education. Thirty-one percent of United States (US) medical students graduating in 2015 had a global health experience during medical school, up from 15% in 1998 [1]. A growing number of trainees in U.S. residency programs are interested in global health as well, prompting an increase in global health education and international opportunities during postgraduate training [2-5]. However, there are significantly fewer opportunities for trainees from low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) to travel to clinical sites other than their own compared to the opportunities for trainees from North America [6-10]. Moreover, when providers from low-and middle-income countries do have clinical experiences in the US, they are typically limited to observation, unlike the frequent hands-on learning when the situation is reversed [38]. "Global health" can be both all-encompassing and vague. Consistent with the Alma Ata declaration, we use "global health" to mean health for all, regardless of location or ethnicity [39]. Global health may or may not include aspects of international medicine, tropical medicine, and public health, but must include a focus on the wellbeing of all aspects of the human experience (physical, social, environmental, spiritual) and be concerned with how health is achieved, with an emphasis on social determinants of health, health disparities, and transnational health solutions [40]. "Global health experiences" in our academic context indicate a dedicated focus on the health of a population different from one's usual setting. For North American (NA) trainees, "global health" rotations, therefore, are typically in a low-income setting-either domestic or international. For trainees from low-and middleincome countries, "global health" electives indicate an experience either in a different low-income setting or in a higher-income setting such as NA or Europe.

show abstract

“…Collaboration with community members can provide opportunities to build local capacity and ensure that benefits are bi-directional. Bidirectional learning refers to international researchers learning about local community concerns, and the community learning about the nature and purpose of the study ( Harris et al, 2020 ; Skopec et al, 2019 ). Engagement can help to build understanding of the technology, facilitating informed decision-making about accepting or declining participation in the research.…”

Section: Core Elsi Issues In Designing and Conducting Field-based Mri Research In Remote And Resource-limited International Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emerging ethical issues raised by highly portable MRI research in remote and resource-limited international settings

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Smaller, more affordable, and more portable MRI brain scanners offer exciting opportunities to address unmet research needs and long-standing health inequities in remote and resource-limited international settings. Field-based neuroimaging research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) can improve local capacity to conduct both structural and functional neuroscience studies, expand knowledge of brain injury and neuropsychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders, and ultimately improve the timeliness and quality of clinical diagnosis and treatment around the globe. Facilitating MRI research in remote settings can also diversify reference databases in neuroscience, improve understanding of brain development and degeneration across the lifespan in diverse populations, and help to create reliable measurements of infant and child development. These deeper understandings can lead to new strategies for collaborating with communities to mitigate and hopefully overcome challenges that negatively impact brain development and quality of life. Despite the potential importance of research using highly portable MRI in remote and resource-limited settings, there is little analysis of the attendant ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI). To begin addressing this gap, this paper presents findings from the first phase of an envisioned multi-staged and iterative approach for creating ethical and legal guidance in a complex global landscape. Section 1 provides a brief introduction to the emerging technology for field-based MRI research. Section 2 presents our methodology for generating plausible use cases for MRI research in remote and resource-limited settings and identifying associated ELSI issues. Section 3 analyzes core ELSI issues in designing and conducting field-based MRI research in remote, resource-limited settings and offers recommendations. We argue that a guiding principle for field-based MRI research in these contexts should be including local communities and research participants throughout the research process in order to create sustained local value. Section 4 presents a recommended path for the next phase of work that could further adapt these use cases, address ethical and legal issues, and co-develop guidance in partnership with local communities.

show abstract

Review of the reverse innovation series in globalization and health – where are we and what else is needed?

Cited by 19 publications

References 23 publications

From reverse innovation to global innovation in animal health: A review

From reverse innovation to global innovation in animal health: A review

Developing Ethical and Sustainable Global Health Educational Exchanges for Clinical Trainees: Implementation and Lessons Learned from the 30-Year Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare (AMPATH) Partnership

Emerging ethical issues raised by highly portable MRI research in remote and resource-limited international settings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About