Couples should be included in HIV prevention research, but their recruitment in southern Africa is challenging given high levels of migration and non-cohabitation, according to the authors of this pilot study. The study describes the recruitment strategies and experiences in rural South Africa when conducting HIV research. With the aim of recruiting 20 couples at mobile voluntary counselling and testing (VCT) caravans and community venues, 75 index partners were screened with an average of four additional contacts required to schedule interviews. The study found that, despite the care taken to maximise recruitment, recruiting just 20 couples required a substantial investment of time and resources, so recruiting and interviewing couples is a feasible option, but requires substantial resources. Given the need to identify effective HIV behavioural interventions in South Africa, the authors believe that couples-focused studies and interventions can be one possible component in efforts to promote testing and reduce HIV transmission.
Monitoring equity and research policy
The first Human Development Report was released in 1990 and the 2010 edition marked the 20th anniversary of these annual United Nations Development Programme reports. A panel discussion at the report’s launch in early November 2010 discussed the findings of the report. David Morrison, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Capital Development Fund, noted how approaches in development 20 ago equated with economic growth and how this has changed, as people have become aware that any measurement of well-being should include opportunities for education and health, and the ability to use knowledge to shape one’s destiny. The panellists highlighted the innovative ways the report continues to measure poverty, including this year’s addition of three new indices, which allow researchers more leeway to compare findings. One of the new measures is the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI), a tool which aims to give a more accurate picture of acute poverty than traditional ‘dollar-a-day’ measures by considering indicators of health, education, and standard of living, in addition to income. One advantage of the tool is it indicates the source of poverty, giving policy makers some insight about causes and manifestations of poverty.
Inadequate regional provisions have been one of the weak links in the global monitoring of, and accountability for, implementation of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). As a result, the question now is how does the regional monitoring and review process need to improve as a more demanding post-2015 development agenda is introduced? To address this question, the paper follows three analytical approaches. First, by reviewing various global-level inputs channelled towards articulating the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), it teases out the implications of the new agenda for a Regional Monitoring and Review Mechanism (RMRM). Second, by revisiting the experiences of various existing frameworks for a regional mechanism, it highlights the strengths and weaknesses of their varying approaches and instruments. Third, the paper tries to identify the critical attributes of the institutional structure and modalities that have to characterize such a mechanism in the new context. In conclusion, the paper underscores the need to bolster regional statistical capacity, particularly in the field of regional public goods and the proposed regional indicators of the sustainable development goals. It also proposes elements of a possible mechanism, building on the existing practices of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP).
This article critically reflects on the experience and lessons from a health-focused social policy research project involving a partnership spanning multiple countries across southern Africa and Europe. It asks what factors condition the efficacy of the partnership–policy nexus. The policy research project Southern African Development Community partnership case study used participatory action research to create a regional indicators-based monitoring toolkit of pro poor health policy and change for the region. The article addresses the partnership drivers, features, methodological context, and process of the project, and the wider implications for constructing partnerships for social change impact. Lessons drawn from this case study underscore the importance of participatory action research -inspired partnership structures and working methods while querying assumptions that the relationship between participatory action research and policy change is seamless. The authors argue that greater focus is needed on the wider institutional context conditioning the work of partnerships when considering the efficacy of a nexus between partnerships and policy.
New reporting guidelines have been published for the growing area of implementation and operational research. The field utilises a range of different research designs, so existing reporting guidelines only partially cover the need for guidance. Wide consultation through the World Health Organization (WHO), the Alliance for Health Policy & Systems Research (AHPSR) and TDR resulted in these recommendations. The paper provides a practical reference for funders, researchers, policymakers, implementers, reviewers and editors working with implementation and operational research. Given that this is an evolving field, they plan to monitor the use of these guidelines and develop future versions as required.
Sub-Saharan Africa accounts for 13·5% of the global population but less than 1% of global research output. In 2008, Africa produced 27 000 published papers—the same number as The Netherlands. Informed by a nuanced understanding of the causes of the current scenario, the authors propose action that should be taken by African universities, governments, and development partners to foster the development of research-active universities on the continent. Since the 1990s, African universities have sought to regain their role as agents of transformation. On a per capita basis, African universities remain severely underfunded in view of increasing enrolment, the establishment of new universities, and the declining purchasing power of African currencies. Part of the explanation is that Africa contributes less than 1% of the global expenditure on research and development. By comparison, Latin America and the Caribbean account for 3%; Europe for 27%; Asia for 31%, and North America for 37%. Sub-Saharan Africa depends greatly on international collaboration and visiting academics for its research output. In 2012, southern Africa, east Africa, and west and central Africa produced 79%, 70%, and 45% of all their research output, respectively, through international collaborations. African Education ministers have met several times recently to address challenges in higher education. The authors argue that research-intensive universities across sub-Saharan Africa need to be identified, recognised, strengthened, and invested in through new sources of funding. Creating and maintaining research-intensive universities will require consistent investment in human capital, research equipment, and relevant administrative support, at far higher levels than is available under current conditions. To ensure that designated research-intensive universities do not become complacent and to allow for the entry of upcoming high-achieving universities, the authors propose on-going peer review every 3–5 years. At a minimum, the authors propose that research-intensive universities commit their own resources to research and that African governments increase their support for research in general and provide targeted funding for research-intensive universities—in addition to the usual operational funds and tuition income currently available to these institutions.
Sub-Saharan Africa accounts for 13.5% of the global population but less than 1% of global research output. In 2008, Africa produced 27 000 published papers—the same number as The Netherlands. Informed by a nuanced understanding of the causes of the current scenario, the authors propose action that should be taken by African universities, governments, and development partners to foster the development of research-active universities on the continent. Sub-Saharan Africa depends greatly on international collaboration and visiting academics for its research output. Many researchers whose publications are associated with sub-Saharan Africa are described as non-local and transitory; they spend less than 2 years at sub-Saharan African institutions. Meanwhile, intra-Africa collaboration remains severely restricted. The authors note that research-intensive universities across sub-Saharan Africa need to be identified, recognised, strengthened, and invested in. These research-intensive universities should focus their resources on graduate training and research. Creating and maintaining research-intensive universities will require consistent investment in human capital, research equipment, and relevant administrative support, at far higher levels than is available under current conditions. New funding mechanisms need to be created to support research-intensive Africa universities. At a minimum, research-intensive universities should commit their own resources to research. African Governments must increase their support for research in general and provide targeted funding for research-intensive universities. They suggest that this will only succeed and be sustained if there is accountability, transparency, and efficiency in the use of funds at research-intensive universities.
There has been a marked lack of dialogue on policymaking between the areas of reproductive health and reform of the health sector. Policies in each area have been developed by different actors, pursuing different objectives. Consequently, disjointed policy-making has tended to predominate. A framework is proposed for enhancing such dialogue and collaboration between the two fields, with reference to links between actors, an understanding of policy contexts, the development of compatible aims and the need for institutional strengthening.
This paper analyses the implementation of health systems strengthening initiatives inclusive of research capacity building. During Population Health Implementation and Training, specific research capacity building activities varied across countries. However, all five countries used African Health Initiative funding to improve research administrative support and infrastructure, implement research training and support mentorship activities and research dissemination. Funders were recommended to provide adequate and flexible funding for research capacity building activities and for institutions to offer a spectrum of research capacity building activities to enable continued growth, provide adequate mentorship for trainees and systematically monitor research capacity building activities.
In the light of the COVID-19 pandemic a collective of organisations have taken urgent action to collate useful guidance and resources related to research ethics. The resources are organized under the following categories: general guidance, social justice, health systems strengthening, preparedness, care and resource rationing, emergency powers, health care worker wellbeing, gender, quarantine and other mandatory measures, clinical trails, guidance for funders and other resource collections.