Low- And Middle-income Countries Institutions Research Articles

Diagnostic and treatment strategies for pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia in low- and middle-income countries.

The survival rate of children and adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), the most common pediatric cancer, has improved significantly in high-income countries (HICs), serving as an excellent example of how humans can overcome catastrophic diseases. However, the outcomes in children with ALL in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where approximately 80% of the global population live, are suboptimal because of limited access to diagnostic procedures, chemotherapeutic agents, supportive care, and financial assistance. Although the implementation of therapeutic strategies in resource-limited countries could theoretically follow the same path of improvement as modeled in HICs, intensification of chemotherapy may simply result in increased toxicities. With the advent of genetic diagnosis, molecular targeted therapy, and immunotherapy, the management of ALL is changing dramatically in HICs. Multidisciplinary collaborations between institutions in LMICs and HICs will provide access to strategies that are suitable for institutions in LMICs, enabling them to minimize toxicities while improving outcomes. This article summarizes important aspects of the diagnosis and treatment of pediatric ALL that were mostly developed in HICs but that can be realistically implemented by institutions in countries with limited resources through resource-adapted multidisciplinary collaborations.

Authorship of Publications Supported by NCI-Funded Grants Involving Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Scientific publication is an important tool for knowledge dissemination and career advancement, but authors affiliated with institutions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are historically underrepresented on publications. To assess the country income level distribution of author affiliations for publications resulting from National Cancer Institute (NCI)-supported extramural grants between 2015 and 2019, with international collaborating institutions exclusively in 1 or more LMICs. This cross-sectional study assessed authorship on publications resulting from NCI-funded grants between October 1, 2015, and September 30, 2019. Grants with collaborators in LMICs were identified in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Query/View/Report and linked to publications using Dimensions for NIH, published between 2011 and 2020. Statistical analysis was performed from May 2021 to July 2022. Author institutional affiliation was used to classify author country and related income level as defined by the World Bank. Relative citation ratio and Altmetric data from Dimensions for NIH were used to compare citation impact measures using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. In this cross-sectional study, 159 grants were awarded to US institutions with collaborators in LMICs, and 5 grants were awarded directly to foreign institutions. These 164 grants resulted in 2428 publications, of which 1242 (51%) did not include any authors affiliated with an institution in an LMIC. In addition, 1884 (78%) and 2009 (83%) publications had a first or last author, respectively, affiliated with a high-income country (HIC). Publications with HIC-affiliated last authors also demonstrated greater citation impact compared with publications with LMIC-affiliated last authors as measured by relative citation ratios and Altmetric Attention Scores; publications with HIC-affiliated first authors also had higher Altmetric Attention Scores. This cross-sectional study suggests that LMIC-affiliated authors were underrepresented on publications resulting from NCI-funded grants involving LMICs. It is critical to promote equitable scientific participation by LMIC institutions in cancer research, including through current and planned programs led by the NCI.

A guideline on guidelines: neuro-oncology guideline standards for low- and middle-income countries.

Guidelines for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are needed in complex, multidisciplinary areas such as oncology, requiring mobilising considerable resources and specialists for coordinated care. Neuro-oncology guidelines have been primarily established in countries where technological advancements and robust care pathways facilitate broad resource utilisation. In contrast, LMICs require complex and region-specific interventions to provide equitable care. The present opinion paper is a culmination of our own centre's experience collaborating and developing loco-regional guidelines for brain tumour care, keeping in mind LMIC experiences and expertise available. We intend for the process and methodology to apply to a broader audience of other LMIC authors and clinicians collaborating with LMIC institutions to develop guidelines and clinical recommendations.

Establishment of Twinning Partnership to Improve Pediatric Radiotherapy Outcomes Globally.

Pediatric radiotherapy is a necessary and challenging component of oncologic care for children in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Collaboration between institutions in LMICs and high-income countries (HICs) has been shown to be effective in improving oncologic treatment outcomes; however, literature regarding pediatric radiotherapy twinning partnerships is limited. Emory University has a long-standing twinning collaboration with Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital (TASH) for certain medical specialties. After securing institutional funding, a faculty member and a resident from the Emory University Department of Radiation Oncology set out to establish a twinning program with TASH for pediatric radiotherapy. Emory and TASH faculty and residents established initial communications virtually via email and video correspondence. TASH residents and faculty completed surveys regarding pediatric radiotherapy institutional and educational needs to outline goals of collaboration. Five lectures and case-based practicums were identified focused on Wilms tumor, medulloblastoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, Hodgkin lymphoma, and palliative radiotherapy. The Emory team then conducted a visit to TASH during which lectures and practicums were delivered. The Emory team directly observed and guided simulation and treatment planning procedures. TASH residents practiced decision making, simulation, contouring, and field placement for Wilms tumor cases on the basis of didactics and feedback provided by the Emory team. Additionally, a needs assessment regarding pediatric oncologic resources was completed. Clinical care pathways and standard operating procedures were drafted by collaborators. Virtual peer-review sessions were established to continue collaborations abroad and plan for next in-person visit. Collaborative efforts by global experts have helped to establish and improve treatment protocols for childhood cancer. The presented twinning experience may serve as a model for other LMIC and HIC centers for establishing similar partnerships.

Teaching Scottish medical students about global health in partnership with LMIC institutions. Does it change their views on volunteering in LMIC settings?

An elective placement is a core part of most United Kingdom (UK) medical degrees, and a significant proportion of students choose to pursue their elective in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). There is a risk that students are ill-prepared for some of the ethical challenges that they will face during these placements, and that they have little appreciation for some of the negative effects that their placement can have on the host healthcare system. This study sought to address some of these negative consequences by exploring the preparation of medical students for these experiences, and the effect of including the LMIC perspective in preparation materials. This qualitative study used thematic analysis to explore the attitudes of final year medical students at a Scottish medical school to international volunteering, after completing a module on global health. This module was designed and delivered in partnership with academics from Malawi, Rwanda and Zambia, thus incorporating a strong LMIC perspective. This study demonstrated the ability of a global health module with a strong LMIC perspective to influence the attitudes of final year medical students in the following ways: 1) Challenging assumptions around international volunteering and, in particular, around some of the negative effects of international volunteering that had not previously been considered. 2) Changing future practice around international volunteering. This study provides good evidence that having a strong LMIC voice in preparation materials for medical students embarking on LMIC electives has the ability to increase awareness of some of the potential harms, and to positively influence how they plan to have discussions around and approach such experiences in the future.

Gaps and priorities in innovation for children's surgery

Lack of access to pediatric medical devices and innovative technology contributes to global disparities in children's surgical care. There are currently many barriers that prevent access to these technologies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Technologies that were designed for the needs of high-income countries (HICs) may not fit the resources available in LMICs. Likewise, obtaining these devices are costly and require supply chain infrastructure. Once these technologies have reached the LMIC, there are many issues with sustainability and maintenance of the devices. Ideally, devices would be created for the needs and resources of LMICs, but there are many obstacles to innovation that are imposed by institutions in both HICs and LMICs. Fortunately, there is a growing interest for development of this space, and there are many examples of current technologies that are paving the way for future innovations. Innovations in simulation-based training with incorporated learner self-assessment are needed to fast-track skills acquisition for both specialist trainees and non-specialist children's surgery providers, to scale up access for the larger population of children. Pediatric laparoscopy and imaging are some of the innovations that could make a major impact in children's surgery worldwide.

Cost Burden of Rigid Internal Fixation in Craniomaxillofacial Trauma Care in Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries

AbstractFractures of the craniomaxillofacial (CMF) skeleton cause significant morbidity and mortality in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). Despite this, quality CMF trauma care is lacking for the majority of the world's population. There is a paucity of literature describing the costs of standard‐of‐care open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) for CMF fractures in LMICs. We consider the cost of a six‐hole plate with six screws (SHPS), standard materials used in ORIF for CMF fractures, as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) per capita to ascertain the cost burden to patients. Hospital pricing catalog data at 14 LMIC institutions were queried. On average, the SHPS cost represented 10.2% of the GDP per capita in sampled LMICs. We highlight manufacturing costs, import taxes, and lack of subsidized health care as factors contributing to the significant cost burden of ORIF in these areas. Future work should characterize additional financial and socioeconomic barriers to optimal CMF care.

A funder-based comparison of global oncology research led by NCI-designated cancer centers: Results from the 2021 global oncology survey.

e18535 Background: Equitable global cancer research partnerships are key to reducing the global burden of cancer, which disproportionately affects low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). One indicator of equitable partnerships is the inclusion of LMIC investigators in global cancer research. In 2021 the National Cancer Institute (NCI) conducted a survey of the 71 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers about their global oncology activity. The survey results highlight cancer centers' non-NIH funded global cancer research, training, and capacity-building projects and complement data about global cancer research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). This analysis presents NIH and non-NIH funded global oncology research led by cancer centers stratified by collaborator income class. Methods: NCI designed and fielded an online survey to cancer center global oncology contacts and principal investigators of research projects from July 2021 through January 2022. Data about NIH grants were sourced from internal NIH systems. Income classes are defined by the World Bank and analysis was conducted in Microsoft Excel and Python. A two proportion Z test was used to test for differences in collaborator income class between NIH grants and non-NIH funded projects. Results: Ninety-four percent (67/71) of cancer centers responded to the survey. Forty-seven cancer centers reported 257 global oncology projects with named international collaborating institutions in 2021. Comparatively, 69 cancer centers held 688 NIH cancer research grants with international collaborating institutions in 2021. These projects and grants had collaborators in 111 countries, including 72 LMICs. Projects and grants were stratified by whether they had collaborators only in high-income countries (HICs), only in LMICs, or in both HICs and LMICs, as shown in Table 1. Non-NIH funded global oncology projects were significantly more likely than NIH grants to have only LMIC collaborators (p = 0.0006) or both HIC and LMIC collaborators (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: While the inclusion of LMIC collaborators in research does not guarantee an equitable partnership nor effective research, it is one indicator of these efforts. The results of the global oncology survey demonstrate that cancer centers are committed to conducting research in LMICs and with LMIC institutions, and they are more likely to collaborate with LMIC institutions when supported by a non-NIH funder or by institutional funds. Further analysis is recommended to understand the extent to which research collaboration indicates equitable partnership, and the barriers and facilitators to collaboration posed by different funding sources. [Table: see text]

Abstract 4186: Underrepresentation of low- and middle-income country affiliated authors in NCI-supported cancer research

Abstract Introduction: We conducted a bibliometric analysis to assess authorship of recent publications involving collaborations in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Methods: We identified active NCI grants awarded directly to LMIC institutions or to US institutions with a collaborator site or sites exclusively in LMICs between 2015-2019 in NIH Query View Report (QVR). Grants were linked to resulting publications using Dimensions for NIH. Because grants may have been active in 2015 while beginning in earlier years, we analyzed any linked publications from 2011 to 2020. Publications with missing author information were excluded. Author institutional affiliation was used to classify author country income level as defined by the World Bank. Authors with multiple institutional affiliations from a high-income country (HIC) and LMIC were classified as such. Relative citation ratio (RCR) and Altmetric data from Dimensions were used to compare citation impact measures using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Results: NCI funded 159 grants to US institutions exclusively with LMIC collaborators and five awards directly to institutions in LMICs from 2015 to 2019, resulting in 2,428 publications between 2011 and 2020, of which 49% had at least one author affiliated with an LMIC institution. Of all publications, 78% and 83% had a first and last author with high-income country (HIC) affiliation, respectively. Publications with HIC-affiliated last authors had significantly higher median RCR and Altmetric attention scores than publications with LMIC-affiliated last authors (p=0.0134 and p=0.0004, respectively). Publications with HIC-affiliated first authors had significantly higher Altmetric scores than publications with LMIC-affiliated first authors (p=0.001). Conclusion: LMIC-affiliated authors are represented on only approximately half of publications resulting from NCI grants awarded directly to LMIC institutions or to US institutions with LMIC collaborators, and rarely in the first or last author position. LMIC-affiliated authors also receive less bibliometric attention when represented. Increased scientific capacity and more equitable collaboration should be critical priorities for the cancer research community working in LMICs moving forward. Citation Format: Linsey Eldridge, Elise Garton, Kalina Duncan, Satish Gopal. Underrepresentation of low- and middle-income country affiliated authors in NCI-supported cancer research. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 4186.

Distance education as a tool to improve researchers’ knowledge on predatory journals in countries with limited resources: the Moroccan experience

The emergence of predatory journals is a global threat for scientific integrity, particularly in under-resourced settings such as low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). A bilingual course on predatory publishing using a distance education approach was developed for Moroccan researchers as a response to the imperative need for training on research ethics to implement good scientific practices. A cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted to evaluate outcomes after delivering two education sessions in both French and English. Before this course, 40% of participants indicated that they don’t verify journal quality before manuscript submission and most of them consider Scopus indexing and the impact factor as the best criteria for journal publication. Approximately 50% of surveyees did not have previous information on predatory journals before the webinar. Pressure to publish by supervisors, institutions of affiliation, or funding agencies, was noticed in 43.4% of participants. After the webinar course was delivered, remarkably, the proportion of participants with knowledge on predatory publishing was meaningfully increased from 48.9% to 81%. Importantly, 83.7% of participants indicated that they are motivated to share their new knowledge on predatory publishing with their colleagues. Moreover, the majority of respondents (73.8%) reported that publishing their research in predatory journals may damage their career and professional future. Promisingly, nearly a half or more of participants recommended the use of training based on distance education, surveillance of researchers by their mentors and affiliations, and social networks to increase awareness on predatory publishing. Almost all participants were satisfied with the content of the webinar. Trainers and research institutions in LMICs should benefit from the advent of distance education using webinar platforms to increase awareness on the issue of predatory publishing in their settings.

Striving towards true equity in global health: A checklist for bilateral research partnerships.

Interest in "global health" among schools of medicine, public health, and other health disciplines in high-income countries (HIC) continues to rise. Persistent power imbalances, racism, and maintenance of colonialism/neocolonialism plague global health efforts, including global health scholarship. Scholarly projects conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) by trainees at these schools in HIC often exacerbate these problems. Drawing on published literature and shared experiences, we review key inequalities within each phase of research, from design through implementation and analysis/dissemination, and make concrete and practical recommendations to improve equity at each stage. Key problems facing global health scholarship include HIC-centric nature of global health organizations, paucity of funding directly available for LMIC investigators and trainees, misplaced emphasis on HIC selected issues rather than local solutions to local problems, the dominance of English language in the scientific literature, and exploitation of LMIC team members. Four key principles lie at the foundation of all our recommendations: 1) seek locally derived and relevant solutions to global health issues, 2) create paired collaborations between HIC and LMIC institutions at all levels of training, 3) provide funding for both HIC and LMIC team members, 4) assign clear roles and responsibilities to value, leverage, and share the strengths of all team members. When funding for global health research is predicated upon more ethical and equitable collaborations, the nature of global health collaborations will evolve to be more ethical and equitable. Therefore, we propose the Douala Equity Checklist as a 20-item tool HIC and LMIC institutions can use throughout the conduct of global health projects to ensure more equitable collaborations.

Addressing quality and safety in anatomic pathology in low- and middle-income countries.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has created a sustainable development goal of reducing preventable mortality from cancer in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) by 30% by 2030. Central to achieving this goal is the creation and maintenance of quality anatomic pathology services (APS). Within the last decade, quality assurance programs and patient safety measures have become a major focus of research for upper middle- and high-income countries (UMHICs), which has led to marked documented improvement in the quality of services provided by laboratories, as well as a decrease in patient safety events. We propose that as APS are developed in LMICs, the lessons learned by UMHICs are necessary to incorporate to produce quality and safe services toward obtaining the aforementioned goal. Furthermore, data suggests that Quality Improvement work requires change at the macrosystems and microsystems levels to achieve these goals. Here, we propose five "microsystems" strategies for professional organizations, healthcare institutions in LMICs and UMHICs that would accelerate quality improvement programs/systems implementation in APS in LMICs.

Highlights from Choosing Wisely 2022 for Resource Limited Settings: Reducing Low Value Cancer Care for Sustainability conference, 17th-18th September, Mumbai, India.

The 'Choosing Wisely 2022' conference, organised by the ecancer foundation, was held at the Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India, on 17 and 18 September. It was a successful event with 159 delegates attending it in person and around 328 delegates attending online. Thirty oncology experts from across the world shared their thoughts during this meeting. The theme of the conference was to focus on cancer care, in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The emphasis of discussion was on ways to select more cost-effective and high value treatments and interventions and minimise financial toxicity. In addition, cancer research from LMICs needs to be improved substantially. Collaboration and networking amongst cancer institutions in LMICs is essential.

Challenges and Opportunities for Increasing Adoption of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Purpose/Objective(s)In the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, professional societies including the American Society for Radiation Oncology and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommended increased adoption of evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT), with benefits including significantly reducing the number of clinical visits for each patient to minimize potential exposure to infection, and reducing treatment costs and stress on limited workforce, particularly beneficial in Low-and-Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). Despite these benefits, HFRT adoption remains low, especially in LMICs. The purpose of this study is to investigate the challenges and opportunities for increased adoption of evidence-based HFRT in LMICs.Materials/MethodsAn IRB-approved survey was implemented in 18 sample radiotherapy centers in African LMIC to assess the challenges and utilization of HFRT. The experiences of three cancer centers were documented as part of an ongoing multi-center HFRT clinical trial designed to compare results with those reported for clinical trials involving North American and European Populations. Based on the findings assessed, challenges from the survey, and recorded experiences from the three centers, an online education and training program was developed in collaboration with the Global Health Catalyst, Radiation Knowledge and computer-based training tools for treatment planning, contouring, and online learning, with remote support provided by members from the international councils of ASTRO and AAPM.ResultsOnly 8 of 18 surveyed clinics reported adopting HFRT as a common practice. Analysis of survey data demonstrated a significant need for training on contouring for radiation oncologists, and treatment planning and quality assurance. An education and training program was developed for implementation in the LMICs via a collaborative education model involving ASTRO and AAPM members who are faculty in USA institutions in collaboration with LMIC radiation oncology professionals.ConclusionThe findings demonstrate a need for additional investment in infrastructure and training, as well as better ongoing education of oncology leaders on the benefits of increased adoption of evidence-based HFRT. The project also highlights opportunities and approaches for leveraging information and communication technology for collaborative high-impact global radiation oncology education, with the participation of members across both LMIC and USA institutions and professional societies. The HFRT training program provides a template for continuous education and training to increase the adoption of evidence-based approaches to HFRT that can significantly increase improved access to radiotherapy and reduce disparities in advancing globally the practice of radiation oncology. The impact of such a program and approach will be presented and discussed.

Using Evidence-Based Pedagogical Approaches to Pivot from In-Person to Online Training in a D43 Program during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruption to medical education globally. Fogarty International Center (FIC) training programs, designed to strengthen research capacity in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), through partnerships between United States and LMIC institutions were particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 disruptions. We adapted short-term training for our FIC HIV Patient-Centered Outcomes Research program in Tanzania to the virtual environment using synchronous, asynchronous, and blended approaches and a variety of teaching pedagogies. We evaluated the acceptability and effectiveness of the new trainings among trainees and facilitators using a mixed-methods approach. Ninety percent of trainees and Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences (MUHAS) facilitators agreed that the virtual training methods used were effective. Trainees reported high levels of satisfaction with the technology, group work, and relevance to their research. More than 50% of trainees and MUHAS facilitators agreed that learning in the virtual environment was as effective as, or more effective than, traditional in-person learning. However, they desired more interaction, opportunities to ask U.S. facilitators questions, and choices about topics for online versus in-person trainings. Two-thirds of U.S. facilitators agreed that the virtual delivery method was an effective way for participants to learn the material, although they also rated interaction less favorably. Virtual training incorporating pedagogical best practices of blended learning and traditional teaching online was a feasible, acceptable, and effective way of conducting research training to junior scientists during COVID-19. Virtual learning could become an integral part of post-pandemic training with some adaptation to improve interactions.

The impact of COVID-19 on speech-language and hearing professions in low- and middle-income countries: Challenges and opportunities explored.

BackgroundSince the advent of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the speech–language and hearing (SLH) professions globally have been confronted with novel and unexpected challenges.ObjectiveThe aim of this article was to explore the impact of COVID-19 on SLH professions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) as presented in the Special Issue of the South African Journal of Communication Disorders in the year 2022.MethodDivergent from the standard editorial writing style, this editorial adopted a research approach where a qualitative, descriptive scoping review design was conducted to meet the objectives of the study. Three specific objectives were targeted: (1) exploring the challenges to SLH research, teaching and practice; (2) establishing evidence-based solutions available for these challenges that can be used to improve the professions’ response in the post-pandemic era; and (3) determining the areas that require further investigation, alternative solutions and innovation for improved readiness for future pandemics. A total of 21 manuscripts were reviewed that covered three predetermined themes – research, teaching and practice – that were constructed through a deductive approach as part of the call for papers for the special issue. These manuscripts were from academics, researchers and clinicians from various institutions in LMICs. The review is presented using thematic analysis.ResultsThe review raised important challenges, presented under various subthemes, to the three key themes. These challenges reflect on the impact of COVID-19 on the SLH professions in terms of research, teaching, service provision and ethical challenges, as well as its impact on speech language, hearing, swallowing and balance functions. The review also advanced solutions and future directions during and beyond COVID-19.ConclusionThese findings raise global implications for research, teaching and practice that are not only relevant to the SLH professions.

Use of individual development plans: experiences from junior faculty in the "NURTURE" mentored research program at Makerere University College of Health Sciences.

Individual Development Plan (IDP) is a multi-component career planning worksheet that guides trainees through an iterative self-assessment. This paper provides the first investigation of IDP use and experiences among junior faculty at academic institutions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where IDP is seldomly used by trainees. An online survey determined the utilization and impact of IDP among junior faculty trainees enrolled on "NURTURE" mentored research program to support career development for faculty at Makerere University College of Health Sciences (MakCHS) between 2016-2020. Responses were received between March and June 2021, a period of intense COVID-19 pandemic in the country. Of 64 trainees 64(39%) were female and 60/64(98%) developed an IDP during the fellowship period; of whom 45/60(75%) had never been exposed to IDP. Trainees' benefits included intentional thinking about own career goals and support to execute the goals as well as self-management skills of time management and communication, among others. IDP was well-received by junior faculty trainees, with several self-management and motivation benefits to the scholars. We recommend that academic programs and faculty at academic institutions in LMIC should consider taking on the IDP approach to promote focused career development for all trainees including junior faculty.

Advances in training of the specialized human resources for health in Tanzania: the case of Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences

BackgroundIncreasing the number of specialized human resources for health is paramount to attainment of the United Nations sustainable development goals. Higher learning institutions in low-and middle-income countries must address this necessity. Here, we describe the 5-years trends in accreditation of the clinical and non-clinical postgraduate (PG) programmes, student admission and graduation at the Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences (MUHAS) in Tanzania, highlighting successes, challenges and opportunities for improvement.MethodsThis was a retrospective longitudinal study describing trends in PG training at MUHAS between 2015 and 2016 and 2019-2020. Major interventions in the reporting period included university-wide short course training programme to faculty on curricula development and initiation of online application system. Data were collected through a review of secondary data from various university records and was analyzed descriptively. Primary outcomes were the number of accredited PG programmes, number of PG applicants as well as proportions of applicants selected, applicants registered (enrolled) and students graduated, with a focus on gender and internationalization (students who are not from Tanzania).ResultsThe number of PG programmes increased from 60 in 2015-2016 to 77 in 2019-2020, including programmes in rare fields such as cardiothoracic surgery, cardiothoracic anesthesia and critical care. The number of PG applications, selected applicants, registered applicants and PG students graduating at the university over the past five academic years had steadily increased by 79, 81, 50 and 79%, respectively. The average proportions of PG students who applied, were selected and registered as well as graduated at the university over the past five years by gender and internationalization has remained stably at 60% vs. 40% (male vs. female) and 90% vs. 10% (Tanzanian vs. international), respectively. In total, the university graduated 1348 specialized healthcare workers in the five years period, including 45 super-specialists in critical fields, through a steady increase from 200 graduates in 2015-2016 to 357 graduates in 2019-2020. Major challenges encountered include inadequate sponsorship, limited number of academic staff and limited physical infrastructure for teaching.ConclusionDespite challenges encountered, MUHAS has made significant advances over the past five years in training of specialized and super-specialized healthcare workforce by increasing the number of programmes, enrollment and graduates whilst maintaining a narrow gender gap and international relevance. MUHAS will continue to be the pillar in training of the specialized human resources for health and is thus poised to contribute to timely attainment of the health-related United Nations sustainable development goals in Tanzania and beyond, particularly within the Sub-Saharan Africa region.

A call to action to reform academic global health partnerships

The global health enterprise has contributed to improving the wellbeing of people and increasing access to health services. However, deep structural inequities persist between institutions from high-income countries (HICs) and...

Considering equity in global health collaborations: A qualitative study on experiences of equity.

International collaborations have become the standard model for global health research and often include researchers and institutions from high income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While such collaborations are important for generating new knowledge that will help address global health inequities, there is evidence to suggest that current forms of collaboration may reproduce unequal power relations. Therefore, we conducted a qualitative study with scientists, researchers and those involved in research management, working in international health collaborations. Interviews were conducted between October 2019 and March 2020. We conducted 13 interviews with 15 participants. From our findings, we derive three major themes. First, our results reflect characteristics of equitable, collaborative research relationships. Here we find both relational features, specifically trust and belonging, and structural features, including clear contractual agreements, capacity building, inclusive divisions of labour, and the involvement of local communities. Second, we discuss obstacles to develop equitable collaborations. These include exclusionary labour practices, donor-driven research agendas, overall research culture, lack of accountability and finally, the inadequate financing of indirect costs for LMIC institutions. Third, we discuss the responsibilities for promoting science equity of funders, LMIC researchers, LMIC institutions, and LMIC governments. While other empirical studies have suggested similar features of equity, our findings extend these features to include local communities as collaborators in research projects and not only as beneficiaries. We also suggest the importance of funders paying for indirect costs, without which the capacity of LMIC institutions will continually erode. And finally, our study shows the responsibilities of LMIC actors in developing equitable collaborations, which have largely been absent from the literature.