How research consortia can contribute to improvements in PhD students’ research environment and progress in sub-Saharan African countries

Background The Africa Capacity Building Initiative (ACBI) programme aimed to ‘strengthen the research and training capacity of higher education institutions and support the development of individual scientists in sub-Saharan Africa through UK-Africa research collaborations’ including by funding PhD studentships. We conducted research to understand students’ experiences and to see how consortia-based programmes such as ACBI and their own institutions can enhance PhD students’ research environment and progress. Methods In-depth interviews with 35 ACBI-funded PhD students explored their perspectives about how their research and personal development benefitted from belonging to a research consortium. Questionnaires were used to corroborate interview findings. Results Students recognised that membership of a research consortium provided many benefits compared to less well-resourced peers. By drawing on the programme and consortiums’ resources, they were often able to overcome some limitations in their own institution’s systems and facilities. Through their consortia they could access a wide range of international expertise and support from mentors and colleagues for their technical and psychosocial needs. Multiple consortia opportunities for engaging with the international scientific community and for networking, gave them confidence and motivation and enhanced their career prospects. Conclusion Our study and its recommendations highlight how the breadth and diversity of resources available to PhD students through research consortia can be harnessed to facilitate students’ progress and to create a supportive and conducive research environment. It also underlines how, through a multi-level approach, consortia can contribute to longer-term improvements in institutional research environments for PhD students

How an international research programme can contribute to improvements in the research environment: the perspective of doctoral students in sub-Saharan Africa

Background The Africa Capacity Building Initiative (ACBI) programme aimed to ‘strengthen the research and training capacity of higher education institutions and support the development of individual scientists in sub-Saharan Africa through UK-Africa research collaborations’ including by funding PhD studentships. We conducted research to understand students’ experiences and to see how consortia-based programmes such as ACBI and their own institutions can enhance PhD students’ research environment and progress. Methods In-depth interviews with 35 ACBI-funded PhD students explored their perspectives about how their research and personal development benefitted from belonging to a research consortium. Questionnaires were used to corroborate interview findings. Results Students recognised that membership of a research consortium provided many benefits compared to less well-resourced peers. By drawing on the programme and consortiums’ resources, they were often able to overcome some limitations in their own institution’s systems and facilities. Through their consortia they could access a wide range of international expertise and support from mentors and colleagues for their technical and psychosocial needs. Multiple consortia opportunities for engaging with the international scientific community and for networking, gave them confidence and motivation and enhanced their career prospects. Conclusion Our study and its recommendations highlight how the breadth and diversity of resources available to PhD students through research consortia can be harnessed to facilitate students’ progress and to create a supportive and conducive research environment. It also underlines how, through a multi-level approach, consortia can contribute to longer-term improvements in institutional research environments for PhD students

Validation of the Arab Youth Mental Health scale as a screening tool for depression/anxiety in Lebanese children

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Early detection of common mental disorders, such as depression and anxiety, among children and adolescents requires the use of validated, culturally sensitive, and developmentally appropriate screening instruments. The Arab region has a high proportion of youth, yet Arabic-language screening instruments for mental disorders among this age group are virtually absent.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We carried out construct and clinical validation on the recently-developed Arab Youth Mental Health (AYMH) scale as a screening tool for depression/anxiety. The scale was administered with 10-14 year old children attending a social service center in Beirut, Lebanon (N = 153). The clinical assessment was conducted by a child and adolescent clinical psychiatrist employing the DSM IV criteria. We tested the scale's sensitivity, specificity, and internal consistency.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Scale scores were generally significantly associated with how participants responded to standard questions on health, mental health, and happiness, indicating good construct validity. The results revealed that the scale exhibited good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.86) and specificity (79%). However, it exhibited moderate sensitivity for girls (71%) and poor sensitivity for boys (50%).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The AYMH scale is useful as a screening tool for general mental health states and a valid screening instrument for common mental disorders among girls. It is not a valid instrument for detecting depression and anxiety among boys in an Arab culture.</p

Strengthening research management and support services in sub-Saharan African universities and research institutions.

Background: International development partners and research councils are increasingly funding research management and support (RMS) capacity strengthening initiatives in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) as part of a broader investment in strengthening national and regional research systems.  However, the evidence-base to inform RMS capacity strengthening initiatives is limited at present. This research note presents a synthesis of 28 RMS capacity assessments completed in 25 universities/research institutions from across 15 SSA countries between 2014 and 2018.  Methods: All 28 capacity assessments were completed following a standardised methodology consisting of semi-structured interviews conducted with research and research support staff at the respective institution as well as document reviews and observation of onsite facilities. Data were extracted from the 28 reports detailing the findings of each assessment according to a framework synthesis approach. Results: In total, 13 distinct capacity gap categories emerged from across the 28 RMS capacity assessment reports.  Almost all the institutions assessed faced multiple gaps in RMS capacity within and across each of these 13 categories. The 13 categories were not independent of each other and were often closely inter-connected. Commonalities were also evident across multiple categories, the two most obvious of which were severe fiscal constraints and the often-complex bureaucracy of the institutional operating environment. Conclusions: The synthesis findings reveal multiple, commonly shared RMS capacity gaps in universities and research institutions across SSA. No single intervention type, or focus, would be sufficient to strengthen capacity across all 13 areas; rather, what is needed to facilitate a significant shift in RMS capacity within such SSA universities and research institutions is a combination of interventions, consisting of differing levels of cost and complexity, variously led (or supported) by both internal and external actors

How international research consortia can strengthen organisations’ research systems and promote a conducive environment and culture

Research systems and cultures have been criticised for their detrimental effect on members’ mental health and wellbeing. Many international research programmes operate through research consortia that have the resources to make a substantial contribution to improving the research environment in their member organisations. This paper collates real-life examples from several large international consortia-based research programmes about how they strengthened organisations’ research capacity. The consortia primarily involved academic partners from the UK and/or sub-Saharan Africa and covered research topics including health, natural sciences, conservation agriculture and vector control. They were partly or wholly funded by UK agencies including the Wellcome, Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office, UK Research and Innovation Fund, and the Medical Research Council and they operated for 2-10 years between 2012-22. Consortia’s size and ability to access and share resources among their member organisations according to need meant they were uniquely placed to target actions to address weaknesses in members organisations’ research capacity, to widen networks and collaborations, and to build in sustainability of capacity gains. Consortia’s actions covered: a) individuals’ knowledge and skills; b) capacity strengthening ethos; c) organisations’ visibility and prestige; and d) inclusive and responsive management practices. Evidence about these actions formed the basis of recommendations for funders and leaders of consortium-based programmes about how they could make more effective use of consortia’s resources to enhance organisations’ research systems, environments and cultures. Key lessons were that training should cover management and research leadership and should be offered beyond consortium members, including to research support staff such as technicians and managers. Consortia often tackle complex problems requiring multi-disciplinary inputs, but overcoming disciplinary boundaries—and making everyone feel valued and respected—takes time and skill on the part of consortium leaders. Consortia need clear guidance from funders about their commitment to strengthening research capacity. Without this, consortia leaders may continue to prioritise research outputs over creating and embedding sustainable improvements in their organisations’ research system

The perception of risk in contracting and spreading COVID-19 amongst individuals, households and vulnerable groups in England: a longitudinal qualitative study.

BackgroundSocial distancing restrictions to manage the COVID-19 pandemic were put in place from March 2020 in the United Kingdom (UK), with those classed as "highly clinically vulnerable" advised to shield entirely and remain at home. However, personal risk perception has been shown to comprise of various elements beyond those outlined in the national pandemic guidance. It is unclear whether those deemed COVID-19 vulnerable identified as high-risk to COVID-19 and thus complied with the relevant advice. The aim of this research is to explore the perception of risk in catching and spreading COVID-19, amongst individuals from individual households, and vulnerable groups in a region of the UK.MethodsTwo individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted, four-weeks apart, with adults living in households in the Liverpool City Region. At the follow-up interview, participants were given the option of using photo-elicitation to guide the discussion. Reflexive thematic analysis was employed to conceptualise themes. The qualitative analysis was underpinned with symbolic interactionism.ResultsTwenty-seven participants (13:14 males:females, and 20 with a vulnerable risk factor to COVID-19) completed a baseline interview, and 15 of these completed a follow-up interview four-weeks later. Following thematic analysis, two overarching themes were conceptualised, with subthemes discussed: theme 1) Confusion and trust in the risk prevention guidance; and theme 2) Navigating risk: compliance and non-compliance with public health guidance.ConclusionParticipants developed their own understanding of COVID-19 risk perception through personal experience and comparison with others around them, irrespective of vulnerability status. COVID-19 guidance was not complied with as intended by the government, and at times even rejected due to lack of trust. The format in which future pandemic guidance is conveyed must be carefully considered, and take into account individuals' experiences that may lead to non-compliance. The findings from our study can inform future public health policy and interventions for COVID-19 and future pandemics

The social risks of premarital sex among university students in Beirut: strategies and negotiations

This thesis examines the social risks university students in Beirut associate with premarital sex, as well as exploring the various strategies they employ when dealing with these risks. Based on 34 in-depth semi-structured interviews with 18 female and 16 male students, this study contributes to sociological research in two main ways. First, it goes beyond the sexual health-risk paradigm, which dominates academic scholarship, and instead enhances our understanding and conceptualisation of ‘sexual behaviour’ and of ‘risk’ by addressing the issue of premarital sex from a ‘social risk’ perspective. Second, it explores premarital sex in a religiously and demographically diverse, yet relatively conservative and patriarchal context. It does this without merely focusing on ‘Muslim women’ and ‘honour killings’ – two of the most featured aspects in the literature. The thesis also draws on Mary Douglas’s socio-cultural work on risk, along with sociological work on gender and power. The findings indicate that decisions about engaging in, or refraining from, premarital sex are shaped by social pressures and control, and dictated by social norms and moral values. Transgressing the latter imposes social risks, which were perceived in three main ways: Moral risk, where one’s respect and reputation might be jeopardised as a result of transgressing social expectations and moral boundaries; Shared risk, where one’s loss of moral reputation might expose one’s family to social shame, blame and dishonour; and Future risk, where women might become ‘unmarriageable’, once they lose their virginity (intact-hymen) or reputation. The findings also reveal that students negotiate their sexual lives and respond to these risks using various strategies, including: a) negotiating non-vaginal-penetrative sex and intimacy, b) undergoing hymen reconstruction, c) performing purity and chastity and d) negotiating temporary religious marriages. The findings demonstrate that, although sexual behaviour can lead to social exclusion, students manage these risks carefully to protect themselves and their families

Strengthening capacity for natural sciences research: a qualitative assessment to identify good practices, capacity gaps and investment priorities in African research institutions

Background: Strengthening research capacity in low-and-middle-income countries is essential to drive socioeconomic development and to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Understanding strengths and weaknesses in institutions’ research capacity can guide effective targeting of investments and resources. This study assessed the capacity of institutions undertaking research in natural science topics in Africa to identify priority capacity gaps for future investment. Methods: Assessments were conducted in eight African institutions that were partners in a UK-Africa programme to strengthen research capacity in renewable energy, soil-related science, and water and sanitation. Assessments involved eighty-six interviews and three focus group discussions to identify institutions’ research capacity strengths and gaps against an evidence-informed benchmark. Use of the same interview guides and data collection processes across all institutions meant that findings could be compared. Results: Common research capacity gaps were: lack of, or poorly maintained, equipment; unreliable, slow procurement systems; insufficient opportunities for developing the skills of research support staff such as administrators and technicians; dysfunctional institutional email communication systems; insufficient focus on the development of ‘soft’ researcher skills such as ethics, academic writing and, in non-Anglophone countries, English language. Programme strengths were the South-South and South-North partnerships for sharing and cascading expertise and resources, joint writing of proposals and publications, and improved individual and institutional visibility. Conclusion: There were many similarities in research capacity gaps irrespective of the institutions’ natural sciences research focus, and these were similar to those reported in the health sector. Common capacity needs are improving the skills of technicians and administrators to support research activities, soft skills training for researchers, and more effective pan-institutional e-communication systems. These could be strategic investment targets for the joint efforts of national governments and international organisations that fund programmes for strengthening research capacity in low- and middle-income countries. Key words: Research capacity strengthening, qualitative assessment, low and middle-income countries, institutions, natural sciences research, Africa

Guidance and conceptual tools to inform the design, selection, and evaluation of research capacity strengthening interventions

International development donors and governments have strengthened their commitment and spend on research capacity strengthening (RCS) initiatives in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) in recent years1. RCS support in a development context is provided on the basis that greater research capacity leads to socioeconomic growth through evidence-informed policy and practice, improvements in human capital and pro-poor products/technologies2. Despite increasing investment, the evidence-base pertaining to the design, selection and evaluation of RCS interventions in LMICs is limited at present confounding informed decision-making3.. There are few robust outcome or impact evaluations of RCS interventions or agreed evaluation frameworks with standardised metrics, and the body of RCS literature that is available is highly fragmented4-7. The current state of the RCS evidence-base reflects, in part, the inherent complexity of the RCS endeavour which may be characterised as a multifaceted, long-term, continuous process subject to a diverse range of influences and assumptions5. Yet it remains the case that there is not yet sufficient evidence to reliably inform which types of intervention, in which combinations, with which focus and in what proportion, are required to build research capacity effectively and sustainably in LMIC settings