ArticleGlobalization and health2016
That's not how the learning works - the paradox of Reverse Innovation: a qualitative study.
Article in Globalization and health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adapting a Participatory Group Programme for Caregivers of Children with Complex Neurodisability from Low-, Middle-Income Countries to a High-Income Setting: Moving from "Baby Ubuntu" to "Encompass".International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Quid Pro Quo? A Critical Perspective on the Global Flow and Spread of Health Innovation.International journal of health policy and management · 2025Article
- A decolonial feminist perspective on gender equality programming in the Global South.PLOS global public health · 2025Review
- Evaluation of hernia surgical meshes sterilised with ethylene oxide for adoption under UK regulations.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Reversing the trend: a scoping review of health innovation transfer or exchange from low- and middle-income countries to high-income countries.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Reciprocal innovation: A new approach to equitable and mutually beneficial global health partnerships.Global public health · 2023Article
- Global Learning for Health Equity: A Literature Review.Annals of global health · 2022Review
- Review
- Review of the reverse innovation series in globalization and health - where are we and what else is needed?Globalization and health · 2020Article
- Parenting Programs for Underserved Populations in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Issues of Scientific Integrity and Social Justice.Global social welfare : research, policy & practice · 2019Article
- Innovative Models in Mental Health Delivery Systems: Task Sharing Care with Non-specialist Providers to Close the Mental Health Treatment Gap.Current psychiatry reports · 2019Review
- From Kisiizi to Baltimore: cultivating knowledge brokers to support global innovation for community engagement in healthcare.Globalization and health · 2018Article
- Low-cost innovation in healthcare: what you find depends on where you look.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2018Article
- Measuring the bias against low-income country research: an Implicit Association Test.Globalization and health · 2017Article
- Shared learning in an interconnected world: the role of international health partnerships.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2017Article
- Do International Health Partnerships contribute to reverse innovation? a mixed methods study of THET-supported partnerships in the UK.Globalization and health · 2017Article
- Global Perspectives on Innovations in Emergency Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed Methods Study.Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shockArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are significant differences in the meaning and use of the term 'Reverse Innovation' between industry circles, where the term originated, and health policy circles where the term has gained traction. It is often conflated with other popularized terms such as Frugal Innovation, Co-development and Trickle-up Innovation. Compared to its use in the industrial sector, this conceptualization of Reverse Innovation describes a more complex, fragmented process, and one with no particular institution in charge. It follows that the way in which the term 'Reverse Innovation', specifically, is understood and used in the healthcare space is worthy of examination.
methodsBetween September and December 2014, we conducted eleven in-depth face-to-face or telephone interviews with key informants from innovation, health and social policy circles, experts in international comparative policy research and leaders in the Reverse Innovation space in the United States. Interviews were open-ended with guiding probes into the barriers and enablers to Reverse Innovation in the US context, specifically also informants' experience and understanding of the term Reverse Innovation. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed thematically using the process of constant comparison.
resultsWe describe three main themes derived from the interviews. First, 'Reverse Innovation,' the term, has marketing currency to convince policy-makers that may be wary of learning from or adopting innovations from unexpected sources, in this case Low-Income Countries. Second, the term can have the opposite effect - by connoting frugality, or innovation arising from necessity as opposed to good leadership, the proposed innovation may be associated with poor quality, undermining potential translation into other contexts. Finally, the term 'Reverse Innovation' is a paradox - it breaks down preconceptions of the directionality of knowledge and learning, whilst simultaneously reinforcing it.
conclusionsWe conclude that this term means different things to different people and should be used strategically, and with some caution, depending on the audience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.