6 research outputs found
Funding and COVID-19 research in Africa: two years on, are the research needs of Africa being met?
Background: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused significantly lower reported mortalities on the African continent as compared to other regions. Yet, many countries on the continent are still contending with the devastating economic, social and indirect health impacts. African researchers and policy makers have identified research priority areas which take cognisance of the unique research needs of African countries. A baseline assessment of the alignment of funded research in Africa to these priorities and World Health Organization’s COVID-19 research priorities was undertaken in July, 2020. We present a two-year update to this analysis of funded COVID-19 research in Africa.
Methods: Data captured in the UK Collaborative on Development Research and Global Research Collaboration for Infectious Disease Preparedness COVID-19 Research Project Tracker as of 15th July, 2022 was analysed. An additional analysis of institutions receiving funding for COVID-19 research is presented. We also analysed the change in funding for COVID-19 research in Africa since July, 2020.
Results: The limited COVID-19 research identified in Africa early in the pandemic has persisted over the subsequent two-year period assessed. When number of projects are considered, governmental funders based in Europe and United States supported the most research. Only nine research funders based in Africa were identified. A number of partnerships between African institutions and institutions based on other continents were identified, however, most research projects were undertaken in research institutions based in Africa only. Our findings highlight the relevance of the WHO research priorities for the pandemic response in Africa. Many research questions raised by African researchers remain unaddressed, among which are questions related to clinical management of COVID-19 infections in Africa.
Conclusions: Two years after the identification of Africa’s COVID-19 research priorities, the findings suggest a missed opportunity in new research funding to answer pertinent questions for the pandemic response in Africa
Geographical Variation in the Response of Visceral Leishmaniasis to Paromomycin in East Africa: A Multicentre, Open-Label, Randomized Trial
Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is a fatal parasitic disease with 500,000 new cases each year according to WHO estimates. New and better treatment options are urgently needed in disease endemic areas due to the long courses, toxicity and development of resistance to current treatments. Recently, the antibiotic paromomycin was tested and registered in India to treat this disease. The current study describes a clinical trial to test the effectiveness of injectable paromomycin, either alone or in combination with the standard drug sodium stibogluconate in three East African countries—Sudan, Kenya and Ethiopia. The study showed that at the same paromomycin dose that was successfully used and registered in India, a far poorer outcome was obtained, particularly in Sudan, suggesting that there are either differences in the patients ability to respond to the drug or in the susceptibility of parasites in East Africa compared with those in India. However, no major safety concerns were noted with the treatment. Further research was initiated to see if a higher dose of paromomycin would perform better, especially in Sudan. The results of this and the performance of the combination arm will be reported later. Our study highlights the importance of considering geographical differences to treatment responses
Medical and social scientists as strategic advisors: the case of GloPID-R in 2021
Many tech firms and government departments have senior executives whose day job is science. How they can also work as strategists has received little attention. We relate how leading scientists set mid-term research funding priorities worth billions of dollars while addressing the COVID-19 pandemic. Using scenario planning, they utilized a phenomenological epistemology better suited to strategy in turbulent conditions (such as the pandemic) instead of the dominant positivism in their scientific work. This article provides insights for scientists interested in strategy and those seeking to reframe an urgent situation with the help of a useful longer-term perspective