Abstract
BackgroundThe increased recognition of the core role of effective primary healthcare has identified large gaps in the knowledge of components of high-quality primary healthcare systems and the need for resources positioned to better understand them. Research consortia are an effective approach to generate evidence needed to address knowledge and evidence gaps and accelerate change. However, the optimal design of consortia and guidance on design decisions is not well studied. We report on a landscape analysis to understand global health research consortium models and major design decisions that inform model choice.MethodsWe conducted a landscape analysis to identify health-related research consortia typologies and explore decision processes leading to their design and implementation. We identified and reviewed 195 research consortia, extracted data on organisation, characteristics and operations for 115 and conducted 14 key informant interviews representing 13 consortia. We analysed interviews using thematic content analysis using results to develop categories of major design choices and research consortia models, structures and processes.ResultsAcross a wide range of research consortia, the structure and function were determined by nine key design decisions that were mapped to three domains: scope: including mission and area of focus; organisational structure: including role and location of the core entity, choice of leader, governance and membership eligibility and responsibility; and funding decisions: including the funding source for research consortia operations and the funding sources and process for consortium research.DiscussionResearch consortia showed important heterogeneity across the nine decision points studied and based on their goals, needs and resources. These decisions and the three emerging domains (scope, organisation and funding) offer a potential framework for new research consortia and inform the design of a proposed primary health care research consortium intended to accelerate research to improve primary health care in LMICs.
Highlights
The increased recognition of the core role of effective primary healthcare has identified large gaps in the knowledge of components of high-quality primary healthcare systems and the need for resources positioned to better understand them
What is already known? ►► While there is a growing body of research on the design and function of global research partnerships that include or are based in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), less has been published about research consortia and networks. ►► To our knowledge, this is the first work to identify the range of typologies and major design choices in developing health research consortia (RCs) and for those addressing evidence gaps in LMICs
What are the new findings? ►► We found that across a wide range of RCs, the structure and function were determined by nine key design decisions that were explicitly or organically made in three domains: scope, organisational structure and funding decisions. ►► RC models ranged from more structured functioning networks with large technical cores and strong central governing bodies to less structured models with minimal or no core and looser governing bodies, reflecting decisions made by organisers and influenced by a number contextual factors
Summary
The increased recognition of the core role of effective primary healthcare has identified large gaps in the knowledge of components of high-quality primary healthcare systems and the need for resources positioned to better understand them. (PHC) for all.[2] Growing recognition of the central role of PHC to achieve universal healthcare and reach the Sustainable Development Goals has catalysed national and international commitments.[3,4,5,6,7,8] the delivery of PHC in many low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) is often weak, inequitable and of poor quality.[9] Multiple stakeholders have recognised the need for better knowledge on how to measure and improve PHC to address these gaps and integrate relevant methodologies such as implementation and health policy research, identifying components of high-performing quality PHC systems and highlighting some
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
