Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30646902›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2019

Contemporary issues in north-south health research partnerships: perspectives of health research stakeholders in Zambia.

Tulani Francis L Matenga, Joseph Mumba Zulu, J Hope Corbin, Oliver Mweemba

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. "Community Over Commercialization": Help Us Keep GHSP Open.Global health, science and practice · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Protecting healthcare workers during a pandemic: what can a WHO collaborating centre research partnership contribute?Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tulani Francis L MatengaDepartment of Health Promotion and Education, University of Zambia, School of Public Health, P O Box 50110, Lusaka, Zambia. matengatulani@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2145-002X
Joseph Mumba ZuluDepartment of Health Promotion and Education, University of Zambia, School of Public Health, P O Box 50110, Lusaka, Zambia.
J Hope CorbinDepartment of Health and Community Studies, Western Washington University, Miller Hall, 317B, MS 9091, Bellingham, WA, 98225, United States of America.
Oliver MweembaDepartment of Health Promotion and Education, University of Zambia, School of Public Health, P O Box 50110, Lusaka, Zambia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe late 1990s and early 2000s have seen a growth in north-south health research partnerships resulting from scientific developments such as those in genetic studies and development of statistical techniques and technological requirements for the analysis of large datasets. Despite these efforts, there is inadequate information representing the voice of African researchers as stakeholders experiencing partnership arrangements, particularly in Zambia. Furthermore, very little attention has been paid to capturing the practice of guidelines within partnerships. In this paper, we present achievements and highlight challenges faced by southern partners in north-south health research partnerships.

methodsA qualitative inquiry was employed using in-depth interviews developed using the Bergen Model of Collaborative Functioning with 20 key informants in Lusaka district in Zambia purposively sampled from a wide range of health research partnerships.

resultsPartnerships produce benefits for southern partners, including evidence generation to influence policy, improved service delivery, infrastructure development and designing interventions to improve the healthcare of populations in greatest need. Most importantly, through partnerships, there is availability of financial resources to accomplish partnership goals. For success to be achieved, there must be effective communication and leadership, values and accountability that go into the process of partnership functioning. Trust interacts with different elements that create partnerships where there is co-ownership of study rewards. Challenging aspects of the interaction are largely due to funding mechanisms where 90% of the funding for health research is from northern partners. This funding mechanism results in power imbalances that lead to publication challenges, dictation of research agenda and ownership of samples and data leading to a general lack of motivation to collaborate.

conclusionMistrust has implications on joint working such that partners find it difficult to work together and produce results greater than their individual efforts. Property rights and resource sharing must be resolved early in the partnership and each partner's contributions recognised. These findings highlight areas that partnerships need to focus on to make the most of guidelines on research partnership with developing countries.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCooperative BehaviorDeveloped CountriesDeveloping CountriesInternational CooperationResearch PersonnelDelivery of Health CareHealth PolicyHumansMotivationPower, PsychologicalPublishingQualitative ResearchResearch Support as TopicStakeholder ParticipationSurveys and Questionnairesachievementschallengeshealth researchnorth–southPartnershippower imbalancestrust

Identifiers

PMID30646902
PMCPMC6334387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.