Cargando…

The quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of Zambia

BACKGROUND: Priority-setting for health research in low-income countries remains a major challenge. While there have been efforts to systematise and improve the processes, most of the initiatives have ended up being a one-off exercise and are yet to be institutionalised. This could, in part, be attr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kapiriri, Lydia, Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5816391/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29452602
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0268-7
_version_ 1783300664273666048
author Kapiriri, Lydia
Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina
author_facet Kapiriri, Lydia
Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina
author_sort Kapiriri, Lydia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Priority-setting for health research in low-income countries remains a major challenge. While there have been efforts to systematise and improve the processes, most of the initiatives have ended up being a one-off exercise and are yet to be institutionalised. This could, in part, be attributed to the limited capacity for the priority-setting institutions to identify and fund their own research priorities, since most of the priority-setting initiatives are driven by experts. This paper reports findings from a pilot project whose aim was to develop a systematic process to identify components of a locally desirable and feasible health research priority-setting approach and to contribute to capacity strengthening for the Zambia National Health Research Authority. METHODS: Synthesis of the current literature on the approaches to health research prioritisations. The results of the synthesis were presented and discussed with a sample of Zambian researchers and decision-makers who are involved in health research priority-setting. The ultimate aim was for them to explore the different approaches available for guiding health research priority-setting and to identify an approach that would be relevant and feasible to implement and sustain within the Zambian context. RESULTS: Based on the evidence that was presented, the participants were unable to identify one approach that met the criteria. They identified attributes from the different approaches that they thought would be most appropriate and proposed a process that they deemed feasible within the Zambian context. CONCLUSION: While it is easier to implement prioritisation based on one approach that the initiator might be interested in, researchers interested in capacity-building for health research priority-setting organisations should expose the low-income country participants to all approaches. Researchers ought to be aware that sometimes one shoe may not fit all, as in the case of Zambia, instead of choosing one approach, the stakeholders may select desirable attributes from the different approaches and piece together an approach that would be feasible and acceptable within their context. An approach that builds on the decision-makers’ understanding of their contexts and their input to its development would foster local ownership and has a greater potential for sustainability. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12961-017-0268-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5816391
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58163912018-02-21 The quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of Zambia Kapiriri, Lydia Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina Health Res Policy Syst Research BACKGROUND: Priority-setting for health research in low-income countries remains a major challenge. While there have been efforts to systematise and improve the processes, most of the initiatives have ended up being a one-off exercise and are yet to be institutionalised. This could, in part, be attributed to the limited capacity for the priority-setting institutions to identify and fund their own research priorities, since most of the priority-setting initiatives are driven by experts. This paper reports findings from a pilot project whose aim was to develop a systematic process to identify components of a locally desirable and feasible health research priority-setting approach and to contribute to capacity strengthening for the Zambia National Health Research Authority. METHODS: Synthesis of the current literature on the approaches to health research prioritisations. The results of the synthesis were presented and discussed with a sample of Zambian researchers and decision-makers who are involved in health research priority-setting. The ultimate aim was for them to explore the different approaches available for guiding health research priority-setting and to identify an approach that would be relevant and feasible to implement and sustain within the Zambian context. RESULTS: Based on the evidence that was presented, the participants were unable to identify one approach that met the criteria. They identified attributes from the different approaches that they thought would be most appropriate and proposed a process that they deemed feasible within the Zambian context. CONCLUSION: While it is easier to implement prioritisation based on one approach that the initiator might be interested in, researchers interested in capacity-building for health research priority-setting organisations should expose the low-income country participants to all approaches. Researchers ought to be aware that sometimes one shoe may not fit all, as in the case of Zambia, instead of choosing one approach, the stakeholders may select desirable attributes from the different approaches and piece together an approach that would be feasible and acceptable within their context. An approach that builds on the decision-makers’ understanding of their contexts and their input to its development would foster local ownership and has a greater potential for sustainability. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12961-017-0268-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-02-17 /pmc/articles/PMC5816391/ /pubmed/29452602 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0268-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Kapiriri, Lydia
Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina
The quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of Zambia
title The quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of Zambia
title_full The quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of Zambia
title_fullStr The quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of Zambia
title_full_unstemmed The quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of Zambia
title_short The quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of Zambia
title_sort quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of zambia
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5816391/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29452602
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0268-7
work_keys_str_mv AT kapiririlydia thequestforaframeworkforsustainableandinstitutionalisedprioritysettingforhealthresearchinalowresourcesettingthecaseofzambia
AT chandakapatapascalina thequestforaframeworkforsustainableandinstitutionalisedprioritysettingforhealthresearchinalowresourcesettingthecaseofzambia
AT kapiririlydia questforaframeworkforsustainableandinstitutionalisedprioritysettingforhealthresearchinalowresourcesettingthecaseofzambia
AT chandakapatapascalina questforaframeworkforsustainableandinstitutionalisedprioritysettingforhealthresearchinalowresourcesettingthecaseofzambia