THE FOGARTY INTERNATIONAL CENTER’S COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC PLAN AND BUDGET TO REDUCE AND ULTIMATELY ELIMINATE HEALTH DISPARITIES

The FIC will play a unique role in addressing health disparities that exist within and among population groups in the United States. Certain populations abroad share similarities with U.S. groups by virtue of their genetic makeup, health practices, lifestyles or other features and, for this reason, advances made through international research studies stand to benefit both U.S. and foreign populations. Such research could lead to effective and culturally relevant education or counseling strategies; development of novel diagnostics, drugs or other intervention technologies; or could contribute to identification of new avenues of research that would ultimately lead to health care interventions. FIC’s programs to support collaborative research and capacity building in low- and middle-income nations are critical to advancing global health research priorities. In addition, through its training programs, FIC is developing the next generation of scientists and health professionals, including those from U.S. minority groups, to address health disparities that exist within the U.S. and within the global community. The current plan elaborates on how further strengthening FIC programs could address U.S. health disparities, and it describes several new activities toward this end

Identifying structures, processes, resources and needs of research ethics committees in Egypt

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Concerns have been expressed regarding the adequacy of ethics review systems in developing countries. Limited data are available regarding the structural and functional status of Research Ethics Committees (RECs) in the Middle East. The purpose of this study was to survey the existing RECs in Egypt to better understand their functioning status, perceived resource needs, and challenges.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We distributed a self-administered survey tool to Egyptian RECs to collect information on the following domains: general characteristics of the REC, membership composition, ethics training, workload, process of ethics review, perceived challenges to effective functioning, and financial and material resources. We used basic descriptive statistics to evaluate the quantitative data.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We obtained responses from 67% (12/18) of the identified RECs. Most RECs (10/12) have standard operating procedures and many (7/12) have established policies to manage conflicts of interests. The average membership was 10.3 with a range from 7-19. The predominant member type was physicians (69.5% of all of the REC members) with little lay representation (13.7%). Most RECs met at least once/month and the average number of protocols reviewed per meeting was 3.8 with a range from 1-10. Almost three-quarters of the members from all of the 12 RECs indicated they received some formal training in ethics. Regarding resources, roughly half of the RECs have dedicated capital equipment (e.g., meeting room, computers, office furniture, etc); none of the RECs have a formal operating budget. Perceived challenges included the absence of national research ethics guidelines and national standards for RECs and lack of ongoing training of its members in research ethics.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our study documents several areas of strengths and areas for improvements in the operations of Egyptian RECs. Regarding strengths, many of the existing RECs meet frequently, have a majority of members with prior training in research ethics, and have written policies. Regarding areas for improvements, many RECs should strive for a more diverse membership and should receive more financial resources and administrative support personnel. We recommend that RECs include more individuals from the community and develop a continuing educational program for its members. Institutional officials should be aware of the resource capacity needs of their RECs.</p

Identifying the domains of context important to implementation science: a study protocol

Background There is growing recognition that “context” can and does modify the effects of implementation interventions aimed at increasing healthcare professionals’ use of research evidence in clinical practice. However, conceptual clarity about what exactly comprises “context” is lacking. The purpose of this research program is to develop, refine, and validate a framework that identifies the key domains of context (and their features) that can facilitate or hinder (1) healthcare professionals’ use of evidence in clinical practice and (2) the effectiveness of implementation interventions. Methods/design A multi-phased investigation of context using mixed methods will be conducted. The first phase is a concept analysis of context using the Walker and Avant method to distinguish between the defining and irrelevant attributes of context. This phase will result in a preliminary framework for context that identifies its important domains and their features according to the published literature. The second phase is a secondary analysis of qualitative data from 13 studies of interviews with 312 healthcare professionals on the perceived barriers and enablers to their application of research evidence in clinical practice. These data will be analyzed inductively using constant comparative analysis. For the third phase, we will conduct semi-structured interviews with key health system stakeholders and change agents to elicit their knowledge and beliefs about the contextual features that influence the effectiveness of implementation interventions and healthcare professionals’ use of evidence in clinical practice. Results from all three phases will be synthesized using a triangulation protocol to refine the context framework drawn from the concept analysis. The framework will then be assessed for content validity using an iterative Delphi approach with international experts (researchers and health system stakeholders/change agents). Discussion This research program will result in a framework that identifies the domains of context and their features that can facilitate or hinder: (1) healthcare professionals’ use of evidence in clinical practice and (2) the effectiveness of implementation interventions. The framework will increase the conceptual clarity of the term “context” for advancing implementation science, improving healthcare professionals’ use of evidence in clinical practice, and providing greater understanding of what interventions are likely to be effective in which contexts

Diseases of the liver and biliary tract : standardization of nomenclature, diagnostic criteria, and diagnostic methodology /

Includes index.Bibliography: p. 181-205.Mode of access: Internet

Poly (ADP-ribose) : an international symposium, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, June 11-13, 1973 /

Includes bibliographies.Mode of access: Internet

Medicine and public health in the People's Republic of China.

"A publication of the Geographic Health Studies, John E. Fogarty International Center for Advanced Study in the Health Sciences."Includes bibliographical references.Mode of access: Internet

Long-term care in six countries : implications for the United States /

A publication of the John E. Fogarty International Center for Advanced Study in the Health Sciences.Includes bibliographical references and index.Mode of access: Internet

International health costs and expenditures : proceedings of an international conference on health costs and expenditures /

"A publication of the Geographic Health Studies, John E. Fogarty International Center for Advanced Study in the Health Sciences."Includes bibliographical references and index.Mode of access: Internet