1. Social innovation in health training to engage researchers in resource-limited settings: process description and evaluation.
- Author
-
Tao, Yusha, Tan, Rayner Kay Jin, Wohlfarth, Megan, Ahumuza, Emmanuel, Aribodor, Ogechukwu Benedicta, Cruz, Jose Rene Bagani, Fajardo, Marvinson See, Magista, Malida, Marley, Gifty, Mier-Alpaño, Jana Deborah, Ogwaluonye, Uchenna Chukwunonso, Paipilla, Kathleen Agudelo, Scott, Charlotte Pana, Ulitin, Allan, Chen, Elizabeth, Wu, Dan, Awor, Phyllis, Tang, Weiming, Labarda, Meredith, and Tucker, Joseph D
- Subjects
MIDDLE-income countries ,CROWDSOURCING ,DIFFUSION of innovations ,ENDOWMENTS ,DIVERSITY & inclusion policies ,HUMAN services programs ,RESEARCH funding ,DEVELOPED countries ,SOCIAL change ,COMMUNITIES ,DESCRIPTIVE statistics ,MANUSCRIPTS ,SURVEYS ,THEMATIC analysis ,PRE-tests & post-tests ,CURRICULUM planning ,RESEARCH methodology ,ADULT education workshops ,ENDOWMENT of research ,MEDICAL research ,PUBLIC health ,RESOURCE-limited settings ,NEEDS assessment ,COMPARATIVE studies ,LOW-income countries - Abstract
Research on social innovations in health has increased in recent years. However, little training is geared toward enhancing social innovation research capacity. Most health training for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is developed by individuals in high-income countries, disregarding LMIC researchers' wisdom and insights and the communities' needs. Our team organized a multi-phase investigation involving a series of surveys and co-creation group discussions to assess individuals' training needs that directly informed a subsequent co-created training workshop series. We conducted a Hennessy–Hicks Training Needs Assessment among the Social Innovation in Health Initiative (SIHI) network and formed a co-creation group comprising SIHI fellows to design related training workshops. We ran a final evaluation survey and analyzed the workshop series' strengths, weaknesses and threats. Descriptive and thematic analysis were employed to analyze survey data and open-ended responses. The final evaluation survey captured data from 165 learners in 35 countries, including 26 LMICs. Most participants (67.3%, 111/165) rated the training workshop series as excellent, and 30.3% (50/165) rated it as good on a five-point scale. The need for writing research grants and manuscripts was rated the highest priority. Learners were interested in community-engaged research and diversity, equity and inclusion. This workshop illustrated how co-creation could be an effective tool for developing training materials tailored for LMIC researchers. We also offer a template for conducting a needs assessment and subsequent training workshops for LMICs. The ground-up, locally developed courses may be more effective than externally developed training programs intended for LMICs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF