Search

Background: This study sought to determine how institutional environments, including values, policies, and their implementation, shape inequities in scientific career progression for women and men, and their disadvantages in relation to their multiple social identities in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The findings are drawn from a wider research study that was aimed at gaining an in-depth understanding of the barriers and enablers of gender-equitable scientific career progression for researchers in SSA. This was nested within the context of the Developing Excellence in Leadership, Training and Science in Africa (DELTAS Africa) programme-a health-based scientific research capacity-strengthening initiative.Methods: The study adopted an exploratory qualitative cross-sectional study design. In-depth interviews (IDIs) with trainees/research fellows at various career stages supported and/or affiliated to three purposively selected DELTAS Africa Research Consortia were the main method of data collection. In addition, key informant interviews (KIIs) with consortia research leaders/directors, co-investigators, and the consortia management team were also conducted to corroborate information gathered from the IDIs, and also to provide additional insights on the drivers of intersectional gender-inequitable career progression. In total, 58 IDIs (32 female and 26 male) and 20 KIIs (4 female and 16 male) were conducted. The interviews were carried out in English between May and December 2018. The data were analysed inductively based on emergent themes.Results: Three interrelated themes were identified: first, characterization of the institutional environment as highly complex and competitive with regard to advancement opportunities and funding structure; second, inequitable access to support systems within institutions; third, informal rules-everyday experiences of negative practices and culture at the workplace, characterized by negative stereotypical attitudes, gender biases, sexual harassment, and bullying and intimidation.Conclusions: We contend that understanding and addressing the social power relations at the meso-institutional environment and macro-level contexts could benefit career progression of both female and male researchers by improving work culture and practices, resource allocation, and better rules and policies, thus fostering positive avenues for systemic and structural policy changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Knowledge translation (KT) is a dynamic and iterative process that includes synthesis, dissemination, exchange and ethically sound application of knowledge to yield beneficial outcomes for society. Effective KT requires researchers to play an active role in promoting evidence uptake. This paper presents a systematised review of evidence on low- and middle-income country (LMIC) researchers' KT capacity, practice and interventions for enhancing their KT practice (support) with the aim of identifying gaps and informing future research and interventions.Methods: An electronic search for peer-reviewed publications focusing on LMIC researchers' KT capacity, practice and support across all academic fields, authored in English and from the earliest records available to February 2019, was conducted using PubMed and Scopus. Selected studies were appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, data pertaining to publication characteristics and study design extracted, and an a priori thematic analysis of reported research findings completed.Results: The search resulted in 334 screened articles, of which 66 met the inclusion criteria. Most (n = 43) of the articles presented original research findings, 22 were commentaries and 1 was a structured review; 47 articles reported on researchers' KT practice, 12 assessed the KT capacity of researchers or academic/research institutions and 9 reported on KT support for researchers. More than half (59%) of the articles focused on sub-Saharan Africa and the majority (91%) on health research. Most of the primary studies used the case study design (41%). The findings suggest that LMIC researchers rarely conduct KT and face a range of barriers at individual and institutional levels that limit their KT practice, including inadequate KT knowledge and skills, particularly for communicating research and interacting with research end-users, insufficient funding, and inadequate institutional guidelines, structures and incentives promoting KT practice. Furthermore, the evidence-base on effective interventions for enhancing LMIC researchers' KT practice is insufficient and largely of weak quality.Conclusions: More high-quality research on researchers' KT capacity, practice and effective KT capacity strengthening interventions is needed. Study designs that extend beyond case studies and descriptive studies are recommended, including better designed evaluation studies, e.g. use of realist approaches, pragmatic trials, impact evaluations, implementation research and participatory action research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]