Promoting sustainable research partnerships: a mixed-method evaluation of a United Kingdom–Africa capacity strengthening award scheme

Background Research partnerships between high-income countries (HICs) and low- or middle-income countries (LMICs) are a leading model in research capacity strengthening activities. Although numerous frameworks and guiding principles for effective research partnerships exist, few include the perspective of the LMIC partner. This paper draws out lessons for establishing and maintaining successful research collaborations, based on partnership dynamics, from the perspectives of both HIC and LMIC stakeholders through the evaluation of a research capacity strengthening partnership award scheme. Methods A mixed-method retrospective evaluation approach was used. Initially, a cross-sectional survey was administered to all award holders, which focused on partnership outputs and continuation. Fifty individuals were purposively selected to participate in interviews or focus group discussions from 12 different institutions in HICs and LMICs; the sample included the research investigators, research assistants, laboratory scientists and post-doctoral students. The evaluation collected data on critical elements of research partnership dynamics such as research outputs, nature of the partnership, future plans and research capacity. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively and qualitative data were analysed using an iterative framework approach. Results The majority of United Kingdom and African award holders stated they would like to pursue future collaborations together. Key aspects within partnerships that appeared to influence this were; the perceived benefits of the partnership at the individual and institutional level such as publication of papers or collaborative grants; ability to influence ‘research culture’ and instigate critical thinking among mid-career researchers; previous working relationships, for example supervisor-student relationships; and equity within partnerships linked to partnership formation and experience of United Kingdom partners within LMICs. Factors which may hinder development of long term partnerships were also identified such as financial control or differing expectations of partners. Conclusions This paper provides evidence of what encourages international research partnerships for capacity strengthening to continue past award tenure, from the perspective of researchers in high and LMICs. Although every partnership is unique and individual experiences subjective, this paper provides extension and support of key principles and mechanisms that can contribute to successful research partnerships between researchers

A Systematic Approach to Capacity Strengthening of Laboratory Systems for Control of Neglected Tropical Diseases in Ghana, Kenya, Malawi and Sri Lanka

Background The lack of capacity in laboratory systems is a major barrier to achieving the aims of the London Declaration (2012) on neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). To counter this, capacity strengthening initiatives have been carried out in NTD laboratories worldwide. Many of these initiatives focus on individuals' skills or institutional processes and structures ignoring the crucial interactions between the laboratory and the wider national and international context. Furthermore, rigorous methods to assess these initiatives once they have been implemented are scarce. To address these gaps we developed a set of assessment and monitoring tools that can be used to determine the capacities required and achieved by laboratory systems at the individual, organizational, and national/international levels to support the control of NTDs. Methodology and principal findings We developed a set of qualitative and quantitative assessment and monitoring tools based on published evidence on optimal laboratory capacity. We implemented the tools with laboratory managers in Ghana, Malawi, Kenya, and Sri Lanka. Using the tools enabled us to identify strengths and gaps in the laboratory systems from the following perspectives: laboratory quality benchmarked against ISO 15189 standards, the potential for the laboratories to provide support to national and regional NTD control programmes, and the laboratory's position within relevant national and international networks and collaborations. Conclusion We have developed a set of mixed methods assessment and monitoring tools based on evidence derived from the components needed to strengthen the capacity of laboratory systems to control NTDs. Our tools help to systematically assess and monitor individual, organizational, and wider system level capacity of laboratory systems for NTD control and can be applied in different country contexts

Behind the Algorithm: A Critical Occupational Perspective on Artificial Intelligence and Human Occupation

Purpose The purpose of this study is to critically examine how artificial intelligence (AI) influences and is influenced by human occupation through a critical occupational lens. Design/methodology/approach Using a critical occupational perspective, this study examines the reciprocal relationship between AI and human occupation. Interdisciplinary literature and reflective analysis are integrated to explore ethical, social, and contextual implications. Findings Emphasising that AI is not neutral but embedded in socio-technical systems, this paper urges occupational therapy practitioners and scholars to engage with AI critically, ethically and contextually. Research limitations/implications The piece has final considerations with reflective questions and recommendations for embedding human dignity, sustainability and equity at the centre of AI development and use in occupational therapy practice. Originality/value Occupational therapy practitioners and scholars are called to recognise its potential to both enable and constrain occupational justice

Towards a Critical Occupational Approach to Research

Critical approaches to research are becoming increasingly more prevalent but occupational science and critical approaches have not been explicitly combined into one approach despite the potential to enrich the understanding of the assumptions and ideologies underlying human activity. In this article we outline an approach to research that is mutually informed by occupational and critical social science perspectives. The critical occupational approach we describe can be used to explore the ways in which knowledge is produced through engagement in occupation, who controls knowledge production, the mechanisms of how occupations are taken up, and who stands to gain or lose. We discuss the implications and considerations for generating research purposes and methods and conducting analyses. We then illustrate the use of the approach through a case study. We conclude this article with consideration of the wider uses and implications of a critical occupational approach within health and social research

Embracing and Enacting an ‘Occupational Imagination’: Occupational Science as Transformative

This paper addresses the question of how occupational science can move forward in its development as a socially and politically engaged discipline. It is argued that a transformative approach to scholarship needs to be embraced, and that enacting such an approach requires a radical reconfiguration of the sensibility underpinning occupational science. After reviewing the key defining characteristics of a transformative paradigmatic approach, key insights regarding how to foster a radical sensibility in occupational science are drawn from C. Wright Mills (1959) conceptualization of ‘the sociological imagination’. Embracing an occupational imagination premised on these key insights would foster the transformative potential of occupational science by providing a sensibility that challenges scholars to make critical, creative connections between the personal, occupational ‘troubles’ of individuals and public ‘issues’ related to historical and social forces. Five key areas of action crucial to attend to in order to move forward in cultivating an ‘occupational imagination’ are outlined, including: pushing beyond the limits of dualistic thinking; attending to the socio-political nature of occupation; addressing the moral and political values that shape and energize occupational science work; questioning the familiar, and exploring the unfamiliar; and, engaging in innovative interdisciplinary syntheses

“The way the country has been carved up by researchers”: ethics and power in north–south public health research

BACKGROUND: Despite the recognition of power as being central to health research collaborations between high income countries and low and middle income countries, there has been insufficient detailed analysis of power within these partnerships. The politics of research in the global south is often considered outside of the remit of research ethics. This article reports on an analysis of power in north-south public health research, using Zambia as a case study. METHODS: Primary data were collected in 2011/2012, through 53 in-depth interviews with: Zambian researchers (n = 20), Zambian national stakeholders (n = 8) and northern researchers who had been involved in public health research collaborations involving Zambia and the global north (n = 25). Thematic analysis, utilising a situated ethics perspective, was undertaken using Nvivo 10. RESULTS: Most interviewees perceived roles and relationships to be inequitable with power remaining with the north. Concepts from Bourdieu\u27s theory of Power and Practice highlight new aspects of research ethics: Northern and southern researchers perceive that different habituses exist, north and south - habituses of domination (northern) and subordination (Zambian) in relation to researcher relationships. Bourdieu\u27s hysteresis effect provides a possible explanation for why power differentials continue to exist. In some cases, new opportunities have arisen for Zambian researchers; however, they may not immediately recognise and grasp them. Bourdieu\u27s concept of Capitals offers an explanation of how diverse resources are used to explain these power imbalances, where northern researchers are often in possession of more economic, symbolic and social capital; while Zambian researchers possess more cultural capital. CONCLUSIONS: Inequities and power imbalances need to be recognised and addressed in research partnerships. A situated ethics approach is central in understanding this relationship in north-south public health research