Cargando…
Evaluating health research priority-setting in low-income countries: a case study of health research priority-setting in Zambia
ABSTRACT: Priority-setting (PS) for health research presents an opportunity for the relevant stakeholders to identify and create a list of priorities that reflects the country’s knowledge needs. Zambia has conducted several health research prioritisation exercises that have never been evaluated. Eva...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6223066/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30404639 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0384-z |
_version_ | 1783369351222525952 |
---|---|
author | Kapiriri, Lydia Schuster-Wallace, Corinne Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina |
author_facet | Kapiriri, Lydia Schuster-Wallace, Corinne Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina |
author_sort | Kapiriri, Lydia |
collection | PubMed |
description | ABSTRACT: Priority-setting (PS) for health research presents an opportunity for the relevant stakeholders to identify and create a list of priorities that reflects the country’s knowledge needs. Zambia has conducted several health research prioritisation exercises that have never been evaluated. Evaluation would facilitate gleaning of lessons of good practices that can be shared as well as the identification of areas of improvement. This paper describes and evaluates health research PS in Zambia from the perspectives of key stakeholders using an internationally validated evaluation framework. METHODS: This was a qualitative study based on 28 in-depth interviews with stakeholders who had participated in the PS exercises. An interview guide was employed. Data were analysed using NVIVO 10. Emerging themes were, in turn, compared to the framework parameters. RESULTS: Respondents reported that, while the Zambian political, economic, social and cultural context was conducive, there was a lack of co-ordination of funding sources, partners and research priorities. Although participatory, the process lacked community involvement, dissemination strategies and appeals mechanisms. Limited funding hampered implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Research was largely driven by the research funders. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is apparent commitment to health research in Zambia, health research PS is limited by lack of funding, and consistently used explicit and fair processes. The designated national research organisation and the availability of tools that have been validated and pilot tested within Zambia provide an opportunity for focused capacity strengthening for systematic prioritisation, monitoring and evaluation. The utility of the evaluation framework in Zambia could indicate potential usefulness in similar low-income countries. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6223066 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-62230662018-11-19 Evaluating health research priority-setting in low-income countries: a case study of health research priority-setting in Zambia Kapiriri, Lydia Schuster-Wallace, Corinne Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina Health Res Policy Syst Research ABSTRACT: Priority-setting (PS) for health research presents an opportunity for the relevant stakeholders to identify and create a list of priorities that reflects the country’s knowledge needs. Zambia has conducted several health research prioritisation exercises that have never been evaluated. Evaluation would facilitate gleaning of lessons of good practices that can be shared as well as the identification of areas of improvement. This paper describes and evaluates health research PS in Zambia from the perspectives of key stakeholders using an internationally validated evaluation framework. METHODS: This was a qualitative study based on 28 in-depth interviews with stakeholders who had participated in the PS exercises. An interview guide was employed. Data were analysed using NVIVO 10. Emerging themes were, in turn, compared to the framework parameters. RESULTS: Respondents reported that, while the Zambian political, economic, social and cultural context was conducive, there was a lack of co-ordination of funding sources, partners and research priorities. Although participatory, the process lacked community involvement, dissemination strategies and appeals mechanisms. Limited funding hampered implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Research was largely driven by the research funders. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is apparent commitment to health research in Zambia, health research PS is limited by lack of funding, and consistently used explicit and fair processes. The designated national research organisation and the availability of tools that have been validated and pilot tested within Zambia provide an opportunity for focused capacity strengthening for systematic prioritisation, monitoring and evaluation. The utility of the evaluation framework in Zambia could indicate potential usefulness in similar low-income countries. BioMed Central 2018-11-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6223066/ /pubmed/30404639 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0384-z 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 Schuster-Wallace, Corinne Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina Evaluating health research priority-setting in low-income countries: a case study of health research priority-setting in Zambia |
title | Evaluating health research priority-setting in low-income countries: a case study of health research priority-setting in Zambia |
title_full | Evaluating health research priority-setting in low-income countries: a case study of health research priority-setting in Zambia |
title_fullStr | Evaluating health research priority-setting in low-income countries: a case study of health research priority-setting in Zambia |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating health research priority-setting in low-income countries: a case study of health research priority-setting in Zambia |
title_short | Evaluating health research priority-setting in low-income countries: a case study of health research priority-setting in Zambia |
title_sort | evaluating health research priority-setting in low-income countries: a case study of health research priority-setting in zambia |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6223066/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30404639 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0384-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kapiririlydia evaluatinghealthresearchprioritysettinginlowincomecountriesacasestudyofhealthresearchprioritysettinginzambia AT schusterwallacecorinne evaluatinghealthresearchprioritysettinginlowincomecountriesacasestudyofhealthresearchprioritysettinginzambia AT chandakapatapascalina evaluatinghealthresearchprioritysettinginlowincomecountriesacasestudyofhealthresearchprioritysettinginzambia |