ReviewInfectious diseases of poverty2026
Evaluation of scientific outcomes of TDR-supported clinical research and development fellows in low- and middle-income countries: a bibliometric analysis.
Review in Infectious diseases of poverty, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR), co-sponsored by World Health Organization, United Nations Children's Fund, United Nations Development Programme, and the World Bank, launched the Clinical Research and Development Fellowship (CRDF) in 1999 to strengthen clinical research capacity in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Despite sustained investment, evidence on the longer-term scientific outcomes of such programmes remains limited. This study evaluated the scientific outcomes of the CRDF programme (1999-2021) using bibliometric analysis of fellows' peer-reviewed publications before and after their fellowship.
methodsA retrospective bibliometric analysis was conducted on peer-reviewed publications authored by CRDF fellows from 1999 through 2021. Publication data were retrieved from Open Researcher and Contributor ID profiles and verified using PubMed, Google search, and Google scholar. A retrospective bibliometric analysis was conducted using descriptive and comparative statistical methods to evaluate publication productivity, authorship position, journal quality metrics, collaboration patterns, disease focus, and research themes before and after fellowship participation. Analyses were conducted using R statistical software. Scientific outcome of the fellowship was judged based on the evolution of collaboration network, journal metrics, and seniority in authorship.
resultsAmong 128 fellows, 76 had verifiable publications, contributing a total of 1821 peer-reviewed articles. Publications were predominantly produced after fellowship participation (1309; 71.9%), compared with 512 pre-fellowship publications. Median publications per fellow increased from 5 [interquartile range (IQR): 2-10] before the fellowship to 14 (IQR: 8-28). The proportion of first-author publications declined (30.7-19.2%), while last-author publications increased (8.0-11.0%), suggesting progression toward senior research roles. Journal quality improved, with publications in Q1 journals increasing from 66.6 to 71.3%, and the median impact factor rising from 2.8 (IQR: 1.9-3.9) to 3.4 (IQR: 2.6-4.9). North-South collaborations increased substantially after the fellowship, while South-South collaborations grew modestly.
conclusionsParticipation in the CRDF programme was associated with a visible increase in research productivity, publication quality, and international collaboration among fellows. Research output aligned closely with infectious diseases of poverty and evolving global health priorities. While the collaboration network expanded, leadership as gauged by the evolution of authorship position remained constrained, highlighting the need for continued investment in research leadership development. Bibliometric analysis offers a useful approach for examining longer-term scientific outcomes of capacity-strengthening initiatives, while recognizing its limitations in capturing broader policy and societal impacts.
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.