ArticleAIDS research and therapy2021
Factors associated with North-South research collaboration focusing on HIV/AIDS: lessons from ClinicalTrials.gov.
Article in AIDS research and therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determinants of collaboration dynamics and challenges in North-South data-driven health research in the African context: an epistemic injustice perspective.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2026Article
- Global Research Trends on Major Pathogenic Enteric Viruses (1990-2024): A Bibliometric Analysis of Epidemiology, Transmission, and Public Health Impact.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Advancing equity in global health: a call for collaborative research partnerships.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- Breaking barriers, changing paradigms: Africa's radical agenda for HIV sustainability.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Review
- A framework for sustainable capacity-building for collaborative North-South translational health research and training in a resource-constrained setting.Health research policy and systems · 2023Review
- COVID-19: The Political Economy of a Global Pandemic.Development and change · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA North-South (N-S) research collaboration is one way through which research capacity of developing countries can be strengthened. Whereas N-S collaboration in HIV/AIDS area may result in research capacity strengthening of Southern partners, it is not clear what factors are associated with this type of collaboration. The study aims to characterize N-S research collaboration focusing on HIV/AIDS and to determine factors associated with such N-S research collaborations.
methodsClinical trial data on HIV/AIDS-related studies conducted between 2000 and 2019 were obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov. Using these data, we characterized N-S collaborative studies focusing on HIV/AIDS and summarized them using frequencies and percentages. To determine factors associated with these studies, we used logistic regression and reported results as adjusted odds ratios with Wald 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Of the 4,832 HIV/AIDS-related studies retrieved from the registry, less than one-quarter (n = 1133, 23%) involved a Southern institution, with 77% of these studies classified as N-S collaborations. Majority of these studies have single PI (50%), are conducted at single location (39%); have large sample sizes (41%); are federally-funded (32%) or receive funding from other sources (32%); are intervention studies (64%); and involve a mixture of male and female participants (58%) and adult participants (54%). Single PIs (as opposed to multiple PIs) were more likely to be from the North than South institution (odds ratio = 5.59, 95%CI: 4.16 - 11.57). Trend analyses showed that N-S research collaborations produced HIV/AIDS-related studies at a faster rate than S-S research collaborations. N-S collaborations involving female or children produced HIV/AIDS-related studies between 2000 and 2019 at a significantly faster rate than S-S collaborations involving females and children during the same period. Holding other factors constant, N-S collaborative research focusing on HIV/AIDS are associated with: multiple PIs as opposed to single PI, multiple institutions as opposed to a single institution, multiple locations as opposed to a single location, large number of participants as opposed to small sample sizes, and public funding as opposed to industry funding. Almost half of these studies had a Northern PI only, about one-third had a Southern PI only, and much fewer had PIs from both North and South. However, these studies were less likely to receive funding from other sources than industry funding.
conclusionsHIV/AIDS-related research is increasingly becoming a more collaborative global research involving more N-S collaborations than S-S collaborations. Factors associated with N-S collaborative studies focusing on HIV/AIDS include multiple PIs, institutions, and locations; large sample sizes; publicly funded; and involve vulnerable populations such as women and children. Whereas almost half of these studies have a Northern PI only, about one-third have a Southern PI only, and much fewer have PIs from both North and South. Our results inform future design and implementation of N-S research collaborations in this area. Suggestions for improvement of ClinicalTrials.gov registry are provided.
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.