Setting priorities for ageing research in Africa: a systematic mapping review of 512 studies from sub-Saharan Africa

BACKGROUND: In 2040, the older population's growth rate in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) will be faster than those experienced by developed nations since 1950. In preparation for this growth, the National Institute on Aging commissioned the National Academies' Committee on Population to organize a workshop on advancing aging research in Africa. This meeting provided a platform for discussing some areas requiring improvement in aging research in SSA regions. We believed that conducting a systematic review of peer-reviewed articles to set priorities for aging research in SSA is warranted. Therefore, this article is the first in a Four-Part series that summaries the types and trends of peer-reviewed studies in SSA. METHODS: This systematic mapping review followed the Search-Appraisal-Synthesis-Analysis Framework. We systematically searched multiple databases from inception till February 2021 and included peer-reviewed articles conducted with/for older adults residing in SSA. Conventional content analysis was employed to categorize studies into subject-related areas. RESULTS: We included 512 studies (quantitative = 426, qualitative = 71 and mixed-method = 15). Studies were conducted in 32 countries. Quantitative studies included were observational studies: cross-sectional (n = 250, 59%), longitudinal (n = 126, 30%), and case-control (n = 12, 3%); and experimental studies: pre-post design (n = 4, 1%), randomized control trial (RCT, n = 12, 3%); and not reported (n = 21, 5%). Fifteen qualitative studies did not state their study design; where stated, study design ranged from descriptive (n = 14, 20%), ethnography (n = 12, 17%), grounded theory (n = 7, 10%), narrative (n = 5, 7%), phenomenology (n = 10, 14%), interpretative exploratory (n = 4, 6%), case studies (n = 4, 6%). Of the 15 mixed-method studies, seven did not state their mixed-method design. Where stated, design includes concurrent (n = 1), convergent (n = 1), cross-sectional (n = 3), informative (n = 1), sequential exploratory (n = 1) and retrospective (n = 2). Studies were classified into 30 (for quantitative studies) and seven (for qualitative and mixed-method) subject-related areas. HIV/AIDs-related and non-communicable diseases-related studies were the most predominant subject-related areas. No studies explored the transdisciplinary co-production of interventions. CONCLUSIONS: There are glaring gaps in ageing research in SSA, especially mixed-methods and RCTs. A large number of studies focused on HIV/AIDs and non-communicable disease-related studies. National and international funding agencies should set up priority funding competitions for transdisciplinary collaborations in ageing research

Methodology and reporting quality of 544 studies related to ageing: a continued discussion in setting priorities for ageing research in Africa

# Background The quality assessment provides information on the overall strength of evidence and methodological quality of a research design, highlighting the level of confidence the reader should place on the findings for decision making. This paper aimed to assess the quality (methodology and quality of reporting) of ageing studies in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). # Method This paper is the second of a Four-Part Series paper of a previous systematic mapping review of peer-reviewed literature on ageing studies conducted in SSA. We updated the literature search to include additional 32 articles, a total of 544 articles included in this paper. Downs & Black checklist, Case Report guidelines checklist, the 45-items Lundgren et al. checklist, and the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool were used to assess the methodological quality of quantitative, case reports, qualitative, and mixed-method studies. Quality assessment was piloted and conducted in pairs for each study type. Depending on the checklist, each study was classified as excellent, good, fair, or poor. # Result Of the 544 articles, we performed the quality assessment of a total of 451 quantitative studies $$Randomized control trials (RCTs) and pre-post (n=15), longitudinal (n=122), case-control (n=15) and cross-sectional (n=300); 4 case reports, 74 qualitative and 15 mixed-method studies. Only 20.4$$. The remaining 433 were rated as moderate quality (n=292, 53.7%), fair quality (n = 96, 17.7%) and poor quality (n = 45, 8.2%). Most (80%) quantitative articles' sample size is small, resulting in insufficient power to detect a clinically or significant important effect. Three-quarter (75%) of the qualitative studies did not report their research team characteristics and a reflexivity component of the 45-items Lundgren et al. checklist. Mixed-method studies with low quality did not report the qualitative studies properly. # Conclusion We conclude that the methodological and quality reporting of published studies on ageing in SSA show variable quality, albeit primarily moderate quality, against high quality. Studies with a large sample size are recommended, and qualitative researchers should provide a section on research team members' characteristics and reflexivity in their paper or as an appendix