Informing ‘good’ global health research partnerships: A scoping review of guiding principles
Background: Several sets of principles have been proposed to guide global health research partnerships and mitigate inequities inadvertently caused by them. The existence of multiple sets of principles poses a challenge for those seeking to critically engage with and develop their practice. Which of...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis Group
2021-01-01
|
| Series: | Global Health Action |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2021.1892308 |
| _version_ | 1818315202124316672 |
|---|---|
| author | Erynn M. Monette David McHugh Maxwell J. Smith Eugenia Canas Nicole Jabo Phaedra Henley Elysée Nouvet |
| author_facet | Erynn M. Monette David McHugh Maxwell J. Smith Eugenia Canas Nicole Jabo Phaedra Henley Elysée Nouvet |
| author_sort | Erynn M. Monette |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: Several sets of principles have been proposed to guide global health research partnerships and mitigate inequities inadvertently caused by them. The existence of multiple sets of principles poses a challenge for those seeking to critically engage with and develop their practice. Which of these is best to use, and why? To what extent, if any, is there agreement across proposed principles? Objective: The objectives of this review were to: (1) identify and consolidate existing documents and principles to guide global health research partnerships; (2) identify areas of overlapping consensus, if any, regarding which principles are fundamental in these partnerships; (3) identify any lack of consensus in the literature on core principles to support these partnerships. Methods: A scoping review was conducted to gather documents outlining ‘principles’ of good global health research partnerships. A broad search of academic databases to gather peerreviewed literature was conducted, complemented by a hand-search of key global health funding institutions for grey literature guidelines. Results: Our search yielded nine sets of principles designed to guide and support global health research partnerships. No single principle recurred across all documents reviewed. Most frequently cited were concerns with mutual benefits between partners (n = 6) and equity (n = 4). Despite a lack of consistency in the inclusion and definition of principles, all sources highlighted principles that identified attention to fairness, equity, or justice as an integral part of good global health research partnerships. Conclusions: Lack of consensus regarding how principles are defined suggests a need for further discussion on what global health researchers mean by ‘core’ principles. Research partnerships should seek to interpret the practical meanings and requirements of these principles through international consultation. Finally, a need exists for tools to assist with implementation of these principles to ensure their application in research practice. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-13T09:01:47Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-699a1a5d684f4b258acd9b89ec9f65ec |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1654-9880 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-13T09:01:47Z |
| publishDate | 2021-01-01 |
| publisher | Taylor & Francis Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Global Health Action |
| spelling | doaj.art-699a1a5d684f4b258acd9b89ec9f65ec2022-12-21T23:53:09ZengTaylor & Francis GroupGlobal Health Action1654-98802021-01-0114110.1080/16549716.2021.18923081892308Informing ‘good’ global health research partnerships: A scoping review of guiding principlesErynn M. Monette0David McHugh1Maxwell J. Smith2Eugenia Canas3Nicole Jabo4Phaedra Henley5Elysée Nouvet6University of Western OntarioUniversity of Western OntarioUniversity of Western OntarioUniversity of Western OntarioUniversity of Global Health EquityUniversity of Global Health EquityUniversity of Western OntarioBackground: Several sets of principles have been proposed to guide global health research partnerships and mitigate inequities inadvertently caused by them. The existence of multiple sets of principles poses a challenge for those seeking to critically engage with and develop their practice. Which of these is best to use, and why? To what extent, if any, is there agreement across proposed principles? Objective: The objectives of this review were to: (1) identify and consolidate existing documents and principles to guide global health research partnerships; (2) identify areas of overlapping consensus, if any, regarding which principles are fundamental in these partnerships; (3) identify any lack of consensus in the literature on core principles to support these partnerships. Methods: A scoping review was conducted to gather documents outlining ‘principles’ of good global health research partnerships. A broad search of academic databases to gather peerreviewed literature was conducted, complemented by a hand-search of key global health funding institutions for grey literature guidelines. Results: Our search yielded nine sets of principles designed to guide and support global health research partnerships. No single principle recurred across all documents reviewed. Most frequently cited were concerns with mutual benefits between partners (n = 6) and equity (n = 4). Despite a lack of consistency in the inclusion and definition of principles, all sources highlighted principles that identified attention to fairness, equity, or justice as an integral part of good global health research partnerships. Conclusions: Lack of consensus regarding how principles are defined suggests a need for further discussion on what global health researchers mean by ‘core’ principles. Research partnerships should seek to interpret the practical meanings and requirements of these principles through international consultation. Finally, a need exists for tools to assist with implementation of these principles to ensure their application in research practice.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2021.1892308equityfairnesstransnationalinternationalvaluesguidelines |
| spellingShingle | Erynn M. Monette David McHugh Maxwell J. Smith Eugenia Canas Nicole Jabo Phaedra Henley Elysée Nouvet Informing ‘good’ global health research partnerships: A scoping review of guiding principles Global Health Action equity fairness transnational international values guidelines |
| title | Informing ‘good’ global health research partnerships: A scoping review of guiding principles |
| title_full | Informing ‘good’ global health research partnerships: A scoping review of guiding principles |
| title_fullStr | Informing ‘good’ global health research partnerships: A scoping review of guiding principles |
| title_full_unstemmed | Informing ‘good’ global health research partnerships: A scoping review of guiding principles |
| title_short | Informing ‘good’ global health research partnerships: A scoping review of guiding principles |
| title_sort | informing good global health research partnerships a scoping review of guiding principles |
| topic | equity fairness transnational international values guidelines |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2021.1892308 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT erynnmmonette informinggoodglobalhealthresearchpartnershipsascopingreviewofguidingprinciples AT davidmchugh informinggoodglobalhealthresearchpartnershipsascopingreviewofguidingprinciples AT maxwelljsmith informinggoodglobalhealthresearchpartnershipsascopingreviewofguidingprinciples AT eugeniacanas informinggoodglobalhealthresearchpartnershipsascopingreviewofguidingprinciples AT nicolejabo informinggoodglobalhealthresearchpartnershipsascopingreviewofguidingprinciples AT phaedrahenley informinggoodglobalhealthresearchpartnershipsascopingreviewofguidingprinciples AT elyseenouvet informinggoodglobalhealthresearchpartnershipsascopingreviewofguidingprinciples |