ACADEMIC RETENTION, RESEARCH CAPACITY, AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICAN UNIVERSITIES

There is a shift of interest towards the current pace of development in Africa especially with regard to science and technology. The rate at which advancements are being recorded in this and other sectors has not been encouraging, as evident from official records. Scholars and researchers in various disciplines have correlated development to education and identified close associations between the level of performance of any citizenry or manpower, and the quality of its education. Accordingly, the quality of life and experience on the African continent has, to an appreciable extent, been characterised as the output variable and the quality of education including that of the teachers, as the input variable. The antecedent variable, too, which in this context is the totality of experience that informs educational directions in Africa, is arguably a product of the input variable. Consequently, the tertiary educational level especially the university system, unlike both the primary and the secondary, may be more strongly associated with the quality of performance. This may be explained through the dominant thinking that the tertiary system is primarily concerned with the production of manpower for various sectors. While there is evidence of research into this question, there is insufficient evidence of research into the interplay of the academic retention system and research capacity development orientation in African universities. This paper is an attempt to investigate that hitherto underrepresented dimension. The study employs a combination of the historical method and analytic philosophy. Its significance lies in its potential to expose, with evidence, the association between the dominant academic retention system and research capacity development orientation in African universities, as well as the implication of such an association for sustainable development in Africa. The study ultimately offers an ameliorative proposal for revitalizing an outcome-oriented research capacity development system in African universities.

Measuring research capacity development in healthcare workers: a systematic review

ObjectivesA key barrier in supporting health research capacity development (HRCD) is the lack of empirical measurement of competencies to assess skills and identify gaps in research activities. An effective tool to measure HRCD in healthcare workers would help inform teams to undertake more locally led research. The objective of this systematic review is to identify tools measuring healthcare workers’ individual capacities to conduct research.DesignSystematic review and narrative synthesis using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist for reporting systematic reviews and narrative synthesis and the Critical Appraisals Skills Programme (CASP) checklist for qualitative studies.Data sources11 databases were searched from inception to 16 January 2020. The first 10 pages of Google Scholar results were also screened.Eligibility criteriaWe included papers describing the use of tools/to measure/assess HRCD at an individual level among healthcare workers involved in research. Qualitative, mixed and quantitative methods were all eligible. Search was limited to English language only.Data extraction and synthesisTwo authors independently screened and reviewed studies using Covidence software, and performed quality assessments using the extraction log validated against the CASP qualitative checklist. The content method was used to define a narrative synthesis.ResultsThe titles and abstracts for 7474 unique records were screened and the full texts of 178 references were reviewed. 16 papers were selected: 7 quantitative studies; 1 qualitative study; 5 mixed methods studies; and 3 studies describing the creation of a tool. Tools with different levels of accuracy in measuring HRCD in healthcare workers at the individual level were described. The Research Capacity and Culture tool and the ‘Research Spider’ tool were the most commonly defined. Other tools designed for ad hoc interventions with good generalisability potential were identified. Three papers described health research core competency frameworks. All tools measured HRCD in healthcare workers at an individual level with the majority adding a measurement at the team/organisational level, or data about perceived barriers and motivators for conducting health research.ConclusionsCapacity building is commonly identified with pre/postintervention evaluations without using a specific tool. This shows the need for a clear distinction between measuring the outcomes of training activities in a team/organisation, and effective actions promoting HRCD. This review highlights the lack of globally applicable comprehensive tools to provide comparable, standardised and consistent measurements of research competencies.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019122310.

‘Capacity for what? Capacity for whom?’ A decolonial deconstruction of research capacity development practices in the Global South and a proposal for a value-centred approach

Whilst North to South knowledge transfer patterns have been extensively problematised by Southern and decolonial perspectives, there is very little reflection on the practice of research capacity development (RCD), still strongly focused on technoscientific solutionism, yet largely uncritical of its underlying normative directions and power asymmetries. Without making transparent these normative and epistemological dimensions, RCD practices will continue to perpetuate approaches that are likely to be narrow, technocratic and unreflexive of colonial legacies, thus failing to achieve the aims of RCD, namely, the equitable and development-oriented production of knowledge in low- and middle-income societies. Informed by the authors’ direct experience of RCD approaches and combining insights from decolonial works and other perspectives from the margins with Science and Technology Studies, the paper undertakes a normative and epistemological deconstruction of RCD mainstream practice. Highlighting asymmetries of power and material resources in knowledge production, the paper’s decolonial lens seeks to aid the planning, implementation and evaluation of RCD interventions. Principles of cognitive justice and epistemic pluralism, accessibility enabled by systems thinking and sustainability grounded on localisation are suggested as the building blocks for more reflexive and equitable policies that promote research capacity for the purpose of creating social value and not solely for the sake of perpetuating technoscience.

Building research capacity and capabilities in Fiji: are we there yet?

Introduction: A barrier to local investigator-led research in low income settings, is the limited availability of personnel with appropriate research skills or qualifications to conduct the type of research required for evidence-informed policy making to improve access and quality of health care. In response to this, Fiji National University’s College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences in Fiji, collaborated with academics based at the University of Auckland, New Zealand to deliver a series of research capacity development workshops in Fiji. Methods: Participants who attended any of the nine workshops (n=123) were contacted via email to take part in a brief survey regarding their perceptions of the effectiveness of the research capacity building workshops. Of the possible 123 participants, 80% (n=76) completed the questionnaire. Results: Findings demonstrate that the majority of participants reported that they had gained research skills from the workshops (75%) including proposal development skills (68%) and knowledge of appropriate research methods (59%). Furthermore, 70% agreed that the workshops built their research confidence. Since attending a workshop, 18% of respondents had successfully applied and received funding for research grants and/or fellowships. Barriers to conduct research included workload (75%), lack of research knowledge, experience or skills (51%), and lack of institutional support (41%). Suggestions for future workshops included: more focus on data analysis, regular courses rather than ‘one offs’, and preparation of research findings (e.g. publications). Conclusion: Our findings indicate that research workshops of this nature may increase individual research capabilities but sustained, locally led initiatives, backed by institutional and supplementary technical support are essential.

Building Research Capacity for Impact in Applied Health Services Research Partnerships Comment on "Experience of Health Leadership in Partnering With University-Based Researchers in Canada – A Call to "Re-imagine" Research"

Bowen and colleagues ask us to re-imagine how to conduct research in academic-practice partnerships, and to develop capacity in the applied research and health workforce to do this. This commentary reinforces their messages, and describes a framework of research capacity development for impact (RCDi) which emphasizes active and continuous experiential learning within research partnerships. The RCDi framework includes the need to focus on multiple levels in the collaboration architecture, and describes principles of working that aims to increase impact on services, and learning opportunities for all partners.

Oceans and human health—navigating changes on Canada’s coasts

Ocean conditions can affect human health in a variety of ways that are often overlooked and unappreciated. Oceans adjacent to Canada are affected by many anthropogenic stressors, with implications for human health and well-being. Climate change further escalates these pressures and can expose coastal populations to unique health hazards and distressing conditions. However, current research efforts, education or training curriculums, and policies in Canada critically lack explicit consideration of these ocean–public health linkages. The objective of this paper is to present multiple disciplinary perspectives from academics and health practitioners to inform the development of future directions for research, capacity development, and policy and practice at the interface of oceans and human health in Canada. We synthesize major ocean and human health linkages in Canada, and identify climate-sensitive drivers of change, drawing attention to unique considerations in Canada. To support effective, sustained, and equitable collaborations at the nexus of oceans and human health, we recommend the need for progress in three critical areas: ( i) holistic worldviews and perspectives, ( ii) capacity development, and ( iii) structural supports. Canada can play a key role in supporting the global community in addressing the health challenges of climate and ocean changes.

Supporting capacity for research on malaria in Africa

Substantial progress has been made in the control of malaria in Africa but much remains to be done before malaria elimination on the continent can be achieved. Further progress can be made by enhancing uptake of existing control tools but, in high transmission areas, additional tools will be needed. Development and evaluation of these new tools will require a substantial cadre of African scientists well trained in many different disciplines. This paper describes the activities undertaken by the Malaria Capacity Development Consortium (MCDC) to support the careers of PhD students and postdoctoral fellows undertaking research on malaria at five African universities. A systematic assessment of constraints on PhD training and research support systems was undertaken at each partner African university at the beginning of the programme and many of these constraints were remedied. The success of the programme is shown by the fact that 18 of the 21 PhD students recruited to the programme completed their theses successfully within a 4-year period and that all 27 scientists recruited to the postdoctoral programme were still working in Africa on its completion. The work of the consortium will be continued through Career Development Groups established at each partner university and at an affiliated institution at the University of Nairobi and through the Developing Excellence in Leadership, Training and Science award from the Wellcome Trust made to one of the African partners. Lessons learnt during the MCDC programme may help the planning and execution of other research capacity development programmes in Africa.