Search

Existing ethics guidelines, influential literature and policies on ethical research generally focus on real-time data collection from humans. They enforce individual rights and liberties, thereby lowering need for aggregate protections. Although dependable, emerging public health research paradigms like research using public health data (RUPD) raise new challenges to their application. Unlike traditional research, RUPD is population-based, aligned to public health activities, and often reliant on pre-collected longitudinal data. These characteristics, when considered in relation to the generally lower protective ethico-legal frameworks of the Global South, including Africa, highlight ethical gaps. Health and demographic surveillance systems are examples of public health programs that accommodate RUPD in these contexts. We set out to explore the perspectives of professionals with a working knowledge of these systems to determine practical ways of appropriating the foundational principles of health research to advance the ever growing opportunities in RUPD. We present their perspectives and in relation to the literature and our ethical analysis, make context relevant recommendations. We further argue for the development of a framework founded on the discussions and recommendations as a minimum base for achieving optimal ethics for optimal RUPD in the Global South., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The INDEPTH Training & Research Centres of Excellence (INTREC) collaboration developed a training programme to strengthen social determinants of health (SDH) research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It was piloted among health- and demographic researchers from 9 countries in Africa and Asia. The programme followed a blended learning approach and was split into three consecutive teaching blocks over a 12-month period: 1) an online course of 7 video lectures and assignments on the theory of SDH research; 2) a 2-week qualitative and quantitative methods workshop; and 3) a 1-week data analysis workshop. This report aims to summarise the student evaluations of the pilot and to suggest key lessons for future approaches to strengthen SDH research capacity in LMICs., Methods: Semi-structured interviews and questionnaires with 24 students from 9 countries in Africa and Asia were used to evaluate each teaching block. Information was collected about the students' motivation and interest in studying SDH, any challenges they faced during the consecutive teaching blocks, and suggestions they had for future courses on SDH., Results: Of the 24 students who began the programme, 13 (54%) completed all training activities. The students recognised the need for such a course and its potential to improve their skills as health researchers. The main challenges with the online course were time management, prior knowledge and skills required to participate in the course, and the need to get feedback from teaching staff throughout the learning process. All students found the face-to-face workshops to be of high quality and value for their work, because they offered an opportunity to clarify SDH concepts taught during the online course and to gain practical research skills. After the final teaching block, students felt they had improved their data analysis skills and were better able to develop research proposals, scientific manuscripts, and policy briefs., Conclusions: The INTREC programme has trained a promising cadre of health researchers who live and work in LMICs, which is an essential component of efforts to identify and reduce national and local level health inequities. Time management and technological issues were the greatest challenges, which can inform future attempts to strengthen research capacity on SDH.

The International Network for the Demographic Evaluation of Populations and Their Health (INDEPTH) is a global network of research centers that conduct longitudinal health and demographic evaluation of populations in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) currently in 52 health and demographic surveillance system (HDSS) field sites situated in sub-Saharan Africa (14 countries), Asia (India, Bangladesh, Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia), and Oceania (Papua New Guinea). Through this network of HDSS field sites, INDEPTH is capable of producing reliable longitudinal data about the lives of people in the research communities as well as how development policies and programs affect those lives. The aim of the INDEPTH Data Repository is to enable INDEPTH member centers and associated researchers to contribute and share fully documented, high-quality datasets with the scientific community and health policy makers., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Background: The importance of tackling economic, social and health-related inequities is increasingly accepted as a core concern for the post-Millennium Development Goal framework. However, there is a global dearth of high-quality, policy-relevant and actionable data on inequities within populations, which means that development solutions seldom focus on the people who need them most. INTREC (INDEPTH Training and Research Centres of Excellence) was established with this concern in mind. It aims to provide training for researchers from the INDEPTH network on associations between health inequities, the social determinants of health (SDH), and health outcomes, and on presenting their findings in a usable form to policy makers., Objective: As part of a baseline situation analysis for INTREC, this paper assesses the current status of SDH training in three of the African INTREC countries - Ghana, Tanzania, and South Africa - as well as the gaps, barriers, and opportunities for training., Methods: SDH-related courses from the three countries were identified through personal knowledge of the researchers, supplemented by snowballing and online searches. Interviews were also conducted with, among others, academics engaged in SDH and public health training in order to provide context and complementary material. Information regarding access to the Internet, as a possible INTREC teaching medium, was gathered in each country through online searches., Results: SDH-relevant training is available, but 1) the number of places available for students is limited; 2) the training tends to be public-health-oriented rather than inclusive of the broader, multi-sectoral issues associated with SDH; and 3) insufficient funding places limitations on both students and on the training institutions themselves, thereby affecting participation and quality. We also identified rapidly expanding Internet connectivity in all three countries, which opens up opportunities for e-learning on SDH, though the current quality of the Internet services remains mixed., Conclusions: SDH training is currently in short supply, and there is a clear role for INTREC to contribute to the training of a critical mass of African researchers on the topic. This work will be accomplished most effectively by building on pre-existing networks, institutions, and methods.

Objectives: The study uses a qualitative empirical method to define Health Research for Development. This project explores the perspectives of stakeholders in an international health research partnership operating in Ghana and Tanzania.Methods: We conducted 52 key informant interviews with major stakeholders in an international multicenter partnership between GlaxoSmithKline (GSK, Vaccine Developer) and the global health nonprofit organisation PATH and its Malaria Vaccine Initiative program (PATH/MVI, Funder-Development Partner), (RTS, S) (NCT00866619). The respondents included teams from four clinical research centres (two centres in Ghana and two in Tanzania) and various collaborating partners. This paper analyses responses to the question: What is Health Research for Development?Results: Based on the stakeholders' experience the respondents offered many ways of defining Health Research for Development. The responses fell into four broad themes: i) Equitable Partnerships; ii) System Sustainability; iii) Addressing Local Health Targets, and iv) Regional Commitment to Benefit Sharing.Conclusion: Through defining Health Research for Development six key learning points were generated from the four result themes: 1) Ensure there is local research leadership working with the collaborative partnership, and local healthcare system, to align the project agenda and activities with local research and health priorities; 2) Know the country-specific context - map the social, health, legislative and political setting; 3) Define an explicit development component and plan of action in a research project; 4) Address the barriers and opportunities to sustain system capacity. 5) Support decentralised health system decision-making to facilitate the translation pathway; 6) Govern, monitor and evaluate the development components of health research partnerships. Overall, equity and unity between partners are required to deliver health research for development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]