Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36691243›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

What are the expectations and experiences of a GMH research programme delivered in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Colombia and Uganda? A prospective longitudinal qualitative study.

Vian Rajabzadeh, Michael McGrath, Francois Van Loggerenberg, Victoria Jane Bird, Stefan Priebe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Vian RajabzadehUnit for Social and Community Psychiatry, WHO Collaborating Centre for Mental Health Services Development, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK vian.rajabzadeh@qmul.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-1123-9805
Michael McGrathUnit for Social and Community Psychiatry, WHO Collaborating Centre for Mental Health Services Development, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Francois Van LoggerenbergUnit for Social and Community Psychiatry, WHO Collaborating Centre for Mental Health Services Development, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Victoria Jane BirdUnit for Social and Community Psychiatry, WHO Collaborating Centre for Mental Health Services Development, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Stefan PriebeUnit for Social and Community Psychiatry, WHO Collaborating Centre for Mental Health Services Development, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 16/137/97
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesGlobal health research collaborations between partners in high-income countries and low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) aim to generate new evidence, strengthen research capacity, tackle health inequalities and improve outcomes. Previous evaluations of such programmes have identified areas for improvement but consisted only of retrospective experiences. We conducted the first prospective study to assess the initial expectations as well as the final experiences of participants of a global health research programme. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND

participantsThis study adopted a prospective longitudinal qualitative study, 38 participants of a global mental health research programme with partners in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Colombia, Uganda and the (UK). The interviewees included senior investigators, coordinators and researchers. Framework analysis was used to analyse the data. OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were interviewed about their initial expectations at the inception of the research programme and their final experiences at the end.

resultsMany of the original expectations were later reported as met or even exceeded. They included experiences of communication, relationships, developed research expertise, further research opportunities and extending networks. However, other expectations were not met or only partially met, mainly on developing local leadership, strengthening institutional research capacity and opportunities for innovation and for mutual learning. Around equity of partnership and ownership of research the views of participants in the UK tended to be more critical than those of partners in LMICs.

conclusionsThe findings suggest that global health research programmes can achieve several of their aims, and that partners in LMICs feel equity has been established in the partnership despite the imbalance of the funding arrangement. Aims of global health research projects should have a realistic focus and be proportionate to the parameters of the funding arrangement. More resources and longer time scales may be required to address sustainable structural capacity and long-standing local leadership sufficiently.

Indexed as

MotivationBosnia and HerzegovinaColombiaHumansProspective StudiesQualitative ResearchRetrospective StudiesUgandainternational health servicesmental healthorganisational development

Identifiers

PMID36691243
PMCPMC9171268

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.