ArticleGlobal health action2026
Shifting power in global health research: a checklist for research funders.
Article in Global health action, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colonial legacies continue to shape who decides, leads, and benefits from global health research. Funders play a pivotal role in this landscape, determining which settings, problems, and approaches are prioritized in research. This paper introduces a checklist for research funders aimed at tackling some of the structural and political dimensions of inequity in global health research. Grounded in a framework that understands 'decolonising global health' across three intersecting dimensions (colonialism within global health, colonisation of global health, and colonialism through global health), the checklist is structured into six strategic areas: (1) shifting power within the health research ecosystem; (2) prioritising health equity in the research portfolio; (3) redressing historical underinvestment in health research systems; (4) addressing potential conflicts of interest that could undermine equity; (5) equitably distributing the outputs of global health research; and (6) reporting on research outcomes and impact. Acknowledging that decolonization would require a full dismantling of the existing aid/funding system, the checklist attempts to broaden the present discourse on decolonising global health research by placing the onus on funding agencies to adopt and implement measures to address structural inequities within the funding ecosystem. While the checklist will require piloting and further refinement, meaningful change within research funding agencies must be accompanied by broader social, political, and epistemic transformations in the field of global health.
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.