Research In Low- And Middle-income Countries Research Articles

Urgent appeal for expanded initiatives in gastric motility disorders across low and middle-income countries: Illustrating the example of gastroparesis

This paper provides a comprehensive exploration of the current state of gastroparesis management in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), emphasising recent innovations, persistent challenges, and future prospects. Gastroparesis, a condition characterised by delayed stomach emptying, presents debilitating symptoms and is notably linked to neuropathic disorders, including diabetes mellitus. Despite an apparent higher prevalence in LMICs compared to the global average, epidemiological data remains scarce. The paper highlights pioneering research in Pakistan, Brazil, and China, showcasing a transformative shift toward comprehensive studies that delve into nuanced aspects of gastroparesis epidemiology, gender-specific patterns, and innovative therapeutic approaches such as acupuncture. However, challenges impeding clinical management and research in LMICs are identified, encompassing the absence of extensive epidemiological studies, lack of treatment guidelines, and the scarcity of specialised training programs for healthcare professionals. These challenges are intertwined with broader issues such as limited healthcare infrastructure, resource disparities, and healthcare workforce shortages. The paper proposes a multifaceted approach for addressing these challenges, involving international collaboration, capacity building, and the integration of gastroparesis management into primary healthcare services. Strategies to combat brain drain, such as collaborative agreements akin to the UK-South Africa Memorandum of Understanding, are advocated.

Long-term health effects of outdoor air pollution on asthma and respiratory symptoms among adults in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs): a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundFew studies have investigated the association between long-term exposure to outdoor air pollution and the risk of asthma and respiratory symptoms in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs).ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the epidemiological evidence regarding the associations between long-term exposure to outdoor air pollution and respiratory symptoms in LMICs.MethodsWe searched for literature published between January 1946 and September 2022 in Embase (Ovid), Medline (Ovid), and Web of Science (Core Collection). The air and gaseous pollutants studied included particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and black carbon (BC), and exposure was 1-year duration or more. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis with a random-effects model to calculate the relative risk (RR) estimates. A rerun of the databases was conducted in November 2023 with no eligible studies found.ResultsOf the 1,346 studies identified, only six met our inclusion criteria, and these six reported PM2.5, PM10, and NO2 with asthma as the main outcome. Three of these included studies were further included in the meta-analysis because they had data on the same exposure and outcome (PM2.5 and asthma). The main result of our study showed a borderline significant association between a 10 µg/m3 increase in exposure to PM2.5 and an increased risk of asthma (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.93, 1.50). There was evidence of considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 75.87%). The regression-based Egger test for small-study effects showed no significant publication bias among these three studies.ConclusionOur results indicate that long-term exposure to PM2.5 increases the risk of asthma in LMICs, but studies are scarce and there is a large need for more research in LMICs in this field.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0288667, PROSPERO (CRD42022311326).

Overcoming barriers to single-cell RNA sequencing adoption in low- and middle-income countries.

The advent of single-cell resolution sequencing and spatial transcriptomics has enabled the delivery of cellular and molecular atlases of tissues and organs, providing new insights into tissue health and disease. However, if the full potential of these technologies is to be equitably realised, ancestrally inclusivity is paramount. Such a goal requires greater inclusion of both researchers and donors in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In this perspective, we describe the current landscape of ancestral inclusivity in genomic and single-cell transcriptomic studies. We discuss the collaborative efforts needed to scale the barriers to establishing, expanding, and adopting single-cell sequencing research in LMICs and to enable globally impactful outcomes of these technologies.

Social innovation in health training to engage researchers in resource-limited settings: process description and evaluation.

Research on social innovations in health has increased in recent years. However, little training is geared toward enhancing social innovation research capacity. Most health training for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is developed by individuals in high-income countries, disregarding LMIC researchers' wisdom and insights and the communities' needs. Our team organized a multi-phase investigation involving a series of surveys and co-creation group discussions to assess individuals' training needs that directly informed a subsequent co-created training workshop series. We conducted a Hennessy-Hicks Training Needs Assessment among the Social Innovation in Health Initiative (SIHI) network and formed a co-creation group comprising SIHI fellows to design related training workshops. We ran a final evaluation survey and analyzed the workshop series' strengths, weaknesses and threats. Descriptive and thematic analysis were employed to analyze survey data and open-ended responses. The final evaluation survey captured data from 165 learners in 35 countries, including 26 LMICs. Most participants (67.3%, 111/165) rated the training workshop series as excellent, and 30.3% (50/165) rated it as good on a five-point scale. The need for writing research grants and manuscripts was rated the highest priority. Learners were interested in community-engaged research and diversity, equity and inclusion. This workshop illustrated how co-creation could be an effective tool for developing training materials tailored for LMIC researchers. We also offer a template for conducting a needs assessment and subsequent training workshops for LMICs. The ground-up, locally developed courses may be more effective than externally developed training programs intended for LMICs.

The HI V O pen Call on I nformed C onsent and E thics in Research (VOICE) for Adolescents and Young Adults: A Digital Crowdsourcing Open Call in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Many adolescents and young adults (AYAs; 10-24 years old) are excluded from HIV research because of social, ethical, and legal challenges with informed consent, resulting in limited AYA-focused data. We use a participatory approach to identify strategies for improving AYA consent processes in HIV research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We conducted a digital crowdsourcing open call for ideas to improve AYA consent to HIV research in LMICs. Crowdsourcing involves engaging a group of people in problem-solving, then sharing emergent solutions. Submissions were evaluated by 3 independent judges using predefined criteria, with exceptional strategies receiving prizes. Demographic data were collected, and textual data were qualitatively analyzed for emergent themes in barriers and facilitators for improving AYA consent in HIV research, guided by a socioecological model. We received 110 strategies total; 65 were eligible for evaluation, 25 of which were identified as finalists. Fifty-eight participants from 10 LMICs submitted the 65 eligible submissions, of which 30 (52%) were 18 to 24 years old. Thematic analysis identified 10 barriers to AYA consent, including HIV stigma, limited education, and legal/regulatory barriers. Strategies for improving AYA consent processes revealed 7 potential facilitators: enhancing AYA engagement in research, involving parents/guardians, improving education/awareness, improving institutional practices/policy, making research participation more AYA-friendly, enhancing engagement of other key communities of interest, and empowering AYA. Diverse communities of interest in LMICs developed compelling strategies to enhance informed consent that may improve AYA inclusion in HIV research. These data will be used to develop practical guidance on improving AYA consent processes.

Effectiveness of road safety interventions: An evidence and gap map.

Road Traffic injuries (RTI) are among the top ten leading causes of death in the world resulting in 1.35 million deaths every year, about 93% of which occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Despite several global resolutions to reduce traffic injuries, they have continued to grow in many countries. Many high-income countries have successfully reduced RTI by using a public health approach and implementing evidence-based interventions. As many LMICs develop their highway infrastructure, adopting a similar scientific approach towards road safety is crucial. The evidence also needs to be evaluated to assess external validity because measures that have worked in high-income countries may not translate equally well to other contexts. An evidence gap map for RTI is the first step towards understanding what evidence is available, from where, and the key gaps in knowledge. The objective of this evidence gap map (EGM) is to identify existing evidence from all effectiveness studies and systematic reviews related to road safety interventions. In addition, the EGM identifies gaps in evidence where new primary studies and systematic reviews could add value. This will help direct future research and discussions based on systematic evidence towards the approaches and interventions which are most effective in the road safety sector. This could enable the generation of evidence for informing policy at global, regional or national levels. The EGM includes systematic reviews and impact evaluations assessing the effect of interventions for RTI reported in academic databases, organization websites, and grey literature sources. The studies were searched up to December 2019. The interventions were divided into five broad categories: (a) human factors (e.g., enforcement or road user education), (b) road design, infrastructure and traffic control, (c) legal and institutional framework, (d) post-crash pre-hospital care, and (e) vehicle factors (except car design for occupant protection) and protective devices. Included studies reported two primary outcomes: fatal crashes and non-fatal injury crashes; and four intermediate outcomes: change in use of seat belts, change in use of helmets, change in speed, and change in alcohol/drug use. Studies were excluded if they did not report injury or fatality as one of the outcomes. The EGM is presented in the form of a matrix with two primary dimensions: interventions (rows) and outcomes (columns). Additional dimensions are country income groups, region, quality level for systematic reviews, type of study design used (e.g., case-control), type of road user studied (e.g., pedestrian, cyclists), age groups, and road type. The EGM is available online where the matrix of interventions and outcomes can be filtered by one or more dimensions. The webpage includes a bibliography of the selected studies and titles and abstracts available for preview. Quality appraisal for systematic reviews was conducted using a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews, AMSTAR 2. The EGM identified 1859 studies of which 322 were systematic reviews, 7 were protocol studies and 1530 were impact evaluations. Some studies included more than one intervention, outcome, study method, or study region. The studies were distributed among intervention categories as: human factors (n = 771), road design, infrastructure and traffic control (n = 661), legal and institutional framework (n = 424), post-crash pre-hospital care (n = 118) and vehicle factors and protective devices (n = 111). Fatal crashes as outcomes were reported in 1414 records and non-fatal injury crashes in 1252 records. Among the four intermediate outcomes, speed was most commonly reported (n = 298) followed by alcohol (n = 206), use of seatbelts (n = 167), and use of helmets (n = 66). Ninety-six percent of the studies were reported from high-income countries (HIC), 4.5% from upper-middle-income countries, and only 1.4% from lower-middle and low-income countries. There were 25 systematic reviews of high quality, 4 of moderate quality, and 293 of low quality. The EGM shows that the distribution of available road safety evidence is skewed across the world. A vast majority of the literature is from HICs. In contrast, only a small fraction of the literature reports on the many LMICs that are fast expanding their road infrastructure, experiencing rapid changes in traffic patterns, and witnessing growth in road injuries. This bias in literature explains why many interventions that are of high importance in the context of LMICs remain poorly studied. Besides, many interventions that have been tested only in HICs may not work equally effectively in LMICs. Another important finding was that a large majority of systematic reviews are of low quality. The scarcity of evidence on many important interventions and lack of good quality evidence-synthesis have significant implications for future road safety research and practice in LMICs. The EGM presented here will help identify priority areas for researchers, while directing practitioners and policy makers towards proven interventions.

The COVID-19 pandemic's effects on mental and psychosocial health in the Philippines: A scoping review.

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) remained at elevated risk for the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic because of persistent stressors to their health systems. Simultaneously facing high infection rates, strict containment measures and natural disasters, the Philippines provides important grounds for health research in LMICs. This review examined how the COVID-19 pandemic affected mental and psychosocial health in the Philippines. This scoping review included literature in English from 2020 to mid-2022 from PubMed, PsycInfo and SCOPUS, and used the PRISMA-ScR and PCC-question model. Two independent reviewers conducted blind article screening and data extraction using COVIDENCE software, followed by consensus building, data charting and analyses. This work identified 405 publications across PubMed (N=56), PsycInfo (N=106) and SCOPUS (N=243), of which 76 articles addressed the Philippines. Article types included 54 research articles, 10 opinion pieces, 4 literature reviews, 6 letters to journals, 1 study protocol and 1 other report. These findings focused primarily on health professionals (N=23) and educators/learners (N=22) and reported mostly on moderate-to-severe clinical outcomes such as fear, depression, anxiety or stress. Coping behaviors, like resiliency and other ways of adapting to the pandemic, including religious, spiritual and community-oriented approaches highlighted experiences with stringent infection prevention and control measures to contain COVID-19 in the Philippines. The COVID-19 pandemic brought severe challenges to mental and psychosocial health in the Philippines. The literature focused mostly on healthcare workers and educators/learners, and moderate-to-severe mental health outcomes in these groups. There is a need to expand studies to other sociodemographic groups and communities across the Philippines. Future work stands to benefit from more in-depth qualitative, mixed methods, longitudinal and representative quantitative research in LMICs following this pandemic. Literature reviews remain important to synthesize post-pandemic experiences by providing context for future studies and health practice in the Philippines and other LMICs.

To adopt or adapt an existing neonatal core outcome set in Kenya: a study protocol

BackgroundDevelopment and use of core outcome set(s) (COS) in research can reduce research wastage by ensuring that a minimum set of outcomes are always reported on. Neonatal morbidity and mortality are a big burden in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Research is continuously being undertaken to reduce this burden. Currently, there is no COS for neonatal research in LMICs but there exists one for neonatal research in high-income countries (HICs).ObjectivesTo determine outcomes that are useful for neonatal care in Kenya to inform whether an existing COS should be adopted or adapted. To assess the feasibility of a routine data collection system to collect data of the agreed-on COS.MethodsA review of existing literature on neonatal research in LMICs followed by a qualitative study of key stakeholders in neonatal care. To explore whether to adapt or adopt, in two hospitals, two focus group discussions with 6–8 parents/caregivers will be undertaken (one each in two hospitals). Key informant interviews will also be conducted with 6 health care providers in each of the hospitals. At the policy-making level, we will conduct 10 key informant interviews. Qualitative data will be analyzed thematically. A consensus meeting will be undertaken with key stakeholders, who will be presented with an overview of the COS developed for HICs, key findings from the literature, and the qualitative study to determine context-appropriate COS. The agreed-on outcomes will be counterchecked against the case records in the two hospitals. The feasibility of collecting the outcomes on a routine electronic research database, the Clinical Information Network that collects standardized data at admission and discharge, will be explored. The congruence (or not) of the outcomes will be documented and be used to enrich the discussion and provide a snapshot of the feasibility of the health information system to collect routine data on the COS.ConclusionsA COS for use in neonatal care in Kenya will help enhance outcome measurements and reporting not just in research but also in routine practice. This will enhance the comparability of interventions in trials and routine settings leading to reduced research wastage and likely improved quality of care. Additionally, the methodology used for this work can be adopted in other settings as a means of adopting or adapting an existing COS.

Training and Accompaniment Model for Expanding ADRD Research in LMICs – The Atlantic Fellows for Equity in Brain Health Experience

AbstractBackgroundOften, global health programs are designed to train individuals from low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs) with training provided in more resourced regions. Subsequently, the trainees return to their home community with limited additional resources. When research is funded, capacity‐building is rarely prioritized and partnership for core administrative and study management needs is absent. A program of ‘accompaniment’ where programs partner with trainees after their training period is less frequent and could alter the landscape of research capacity building for dementia.MethodsThe Atlantic Fellows for Equity in Brain Health program provides both a one‐year in‐residence learning experience and seeks to accompany fellows as they return to their home community. Resources and activities in the post‐training period include funding for small pilot projects, networking and community building, training in grants management, support for logistic and administrative activities related to grants, partnering with grant and manuscript writing and assistance with data collection and management.ResultsOver seven years, Atlantic Fellows have received 137 Pilots Awards ($25k each) for activities in 41 countries. Many of these awards serve as launching pads for future funding. For example, the Multi‐Partner Consortium for Dementia Research in Latin America (ReDLat) grew out of a Pilot awarded to an Atlantic Fellow from Latin America uniting 14 research centers across six Latin American countries aiming to identify the unique genetic and social determinants of health that drive Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. Work is underway and includes prominent capacity building activities with more than $12M in committed from global partners. More than 1454 individuals have been enrolled. Eleven Atlantic Fellows are directly involved in the project. Other examples include work in Brazil that has now been transformed into US National Institutes of Health funding. New work is currently launched in East Africa leading to competitive research applications under review.ConclusionsAn intentional model of accompaniment can achieve substantial impact on dementia research in LMICs.

A cross-sectional analysis of publication of pediatric global health abstracts from seven major international conferences.

Research presented at conferences may increase context-specific evidence in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where global childhood disease burden is greatest and where massive relative deficits in research persist. Publication of studies presented at conferences is necessary for complete results dissemination. Our objective was to determine the frequency of publication of pediatric global health conference abstracts and to identify factors associated with publication. We conducted a cross-sectional study of abstracts that reported pediatric research conducted in at least one LMIC presented at seven major scientific conferences in 2017, 2018, and 2019. We used PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar to search for publications of the results presented as abstracts. We created a Kaplan-Meier curve to determine the cumulative incidence of publications and used predetermined abstract-level factors to create a multivariable Cox proportional hazard model to identify factors associated with time to publication. There were 8,105 abstracts reviewed and 1,433 (17.7%) reported pediatric research conducted in one or more LMICs. The probability of publication of pediatric global health abstracts was 33.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 31.2-36.1%) at 24 months and 46.6% (95% CI 44.0-49.3%) at 48 months. Abstracts that reported research conducted in East Asia and Pacific (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 3.06, 95% CI 1.74-5.24), South Asia (aHR 2.25, 95% CI 1.30-3.91%), and upper-middle-income countries (1.50, 95% CI 1.12-2.02) were published sooner than those that reported research in LMICs in Europe and Central Asia and lower-middle-income countries, respectively. Fewer than half of pediatric global health abstracts were published in peer-reviewed journals up to four years after presentation at international conferences. Efforts are urgently needed to promote the widespread and long-lasting dissemination of pediatric research conducted in LMICs presented as abstracts to provide a more robust evidence base for both clinical care and policy related to child health.

Best Practices for Developing International Academic Partnerships in Orthopaedics.

Traumatic and nontraumatic orthopaedic conditions are major contributors to global morbidity and account for the majority of life-years lived with disability worldwide. Additionally, the burden of musculoskeletal injuries has increased substantially over the past 3 decades. Unfortunately, in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), access to orthopaedic care is limited, leading to a disproportionate burden of disease. The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery has emphasized the urgent need for unified international commitment and research collaboration to achieve universal access to safe and affordable surgical care. However, conducting high-quality orthopaedic research in LMICs remains challenging as a result of disparities in training, access to resources, infrastructure, and equipment availability. Partnerships between high-income countries (HICs) and LMICs have emerged in recent decades as an effective approach to combatting some of these challenges. These partnerships aim to bridge the gaps by facilitating collaborative research and knowledge exchange. The establishment of successful partnerships requires a collaborative and reciprocal approach that starts with a clear understanding of mutual research aims and the availability of resources. Despite the potential benefits, various factors can make establishing such partnerships difficult. However, these partnerships can have a substantial impact in delivering quality orthopaedic education and research training, thus improving access to care in resource-limited environments. This paper represents the collaborative effort of multiple international academic orthopaedic surgeons with extensive experience in HIC-LMIC partnerships. Our aims were to outline the best practices for conducting orthopaedic research within these relationships and to provide guidance for future successful collaborations.

Digital Rights and Mobile Health in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

Digital technology is a means to uphold or violate human rights in various domains, including business, military, and health. Given the pervasiveness of mobile technology in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), mobile health (mHealth) interventions present an opportunity to reach remote populations and enable them to exercise civil and political rights and economic, social, and cultural rights, such as the right to health and education. Simultaneously, the ubiquity of mobile phones involves processing sensitive data which can threaten rights, including the right to privacy and nondiscrimination. Digital health is often promoted as advancing human rights and health equity; however, digital rights are underexplored in the literature on mHealth in LMICs. As such, creating an understanding of the digital rights topics covered in the 2022 literature is important to avoid exacerbating existing inequities relating to digital health design, use, implementation, and access. This scoping review aims to identify digital rights topics in the 2022 peer-reviewed literature on mHealth in LMICs. The Arksey and O'Malley framework for scoping reviews guides this review. Searches were performed across 7 electronic databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Ovid, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, ProQuest, and PubMed). The screening processes were guided by the research question "What digital rights topics have been explored in the 2022 literature on mHealth in LMICs?" Only papers addressing mHealth in LMICs and digital rights topics were included. Data extraction will include publication title, year, and type; first author's affiliation country; LMICs implicated; infrastructure challenges; study aims, design, limitations, and future work; health area; mHealth technology, functions, purpose or application, and target end users; human or digital right terms used; explicit rights topics cited; and implied rights topics. The results will be reported using the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. This scoping review was registered in Open Science Framework (December 22, 2022). Title and abstract screening and full-text paper screening were completed in 2023. This resulted in 56 papers being included in the study. The target date for completing data extraction and publishing a case study of the initial findings is the end of 2023. The full scoping review findings are expected to be disseminated through various pathways benefiting academia, practice, and policy making by the end of 2024. These include journal papers, conference presentations, publicly available toolkits for research and practice, public webinars, and policy briefs with evidence-based policy recommendations emerging from this review. The planned scoping review will identify digital rights topics in the 2022 literature at the intersection of mHealth and LMICs. Furthermore, it will highlight the importance of patient empowerment, data protection, and inclusion in mHealth research and related policies in LMICs. Open Science Framework osf.io/7mz24; https://osf.io/7mz24. DERR1-10.2196/49150.

Health research mentorship in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

The objective of this scoping review was to explore and synthesize the available literature on health research mentorship in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Research mentorship is broadly considered a useful strategy to improve research capacities and research outputs. Existing literature and guidance on research mentorship have focused on high-income countries and assumed resource-rich environments. Despite the successful endeavors to improve health research capacity in LMICs, the strategies that work best under different circumstances are poorly understood. There is a need to map and understand the evidence on health research mentorship in the context of LMICs. Sources that reported existing practices, barriers, and mitigation strategies related to health research mentorship in LMICs were included. We searched for published and unpublished studies and reports written in English, Spanish, or Portuguese. The search strategy was not limited by search dates and the last search was conducted on January 28, 2022. The databases searched included MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and JBI Evidence Synthesis. We also searched for gray literature in a selection of websites and digital repositories. The JBI scoping review methodology was used. A total of 77 studies and reports were included in the review. The majority of the papers were from Africa (n=28). Others were from Americas (n=7), South East Asia (n=4), East Mediterranean (n=2), and Western Pacific (n=2). The remaining studies were from LMICs that included at least two regional offices. Most of the mentorship projects (n=55) were initiated and funded by institutions from high-income countries. The first authors of 41 papers were primarily affiliated from LMICs. The findings were categorized under a description of research mentorship practices, barriers related to research mentorship, and suggested mitigation strategies. Deliverable-driven training using intensive hands-on mentorship and ongoing peer mentorship programs were some of the non-regular, non-institutionalized approaches used to improve research capacity for junior researchers in LMICs. None of the included papers focused on institutional components of research mentorship in LMICs. The barriers to research mentorship activities in LMICs included lack of clarity on mentorship, cultural variations, unbalanced power dynamics, socio-political influences, language barriers, lack of experienced mentors, and limited local funding. Institutionalizing research mentorship, adapting mentoring methodologies relying on local resources, and addressing and respecting diversity in mentorship programs were among the main strategies identified to effectively implement research mentorship in LMICs. Research mentorship initiatives and practices are limited in LMICs. Few available practices are introduced by researchers and research institutions from high-income countries and yet not institutionalized. The identified existing practices, barriers, and facilitators on health research mentorship could help the design, implementation, and evaluation of programs to institutionalize health research mentorship in LMICs. Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/jqa9z/.

Global Surgery Research: An Overview and the Role of Medical Students and Surgical Trainees in Advancing Global Surgery Research in LMICs

Global surgery research is a critical area of study aimed at enhancing access to safe and effective surgical care for patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It is essential to explore the significance of global surgery research and highlight the potential contributions of medical students and surgical trainees in addressing the pressing needs of LMIC populations. Global surgery research is pivotal in driving progress and fostering innovation by evaluating surgical disease burden, identifying access barriers, developing sustainable solutions, and strengthening health systems. Additionally, integrating sustainability principles into global surgery research endeavors ensures surgical interventions benefit patients while minimizing the environmental impact of surgical care delivery. Medical students and surgical trainees can engage in global surgery research, including collaborating with experienced researchers, developing research projects with local partners, conducting literature reviews, collecting and analyzing data, and disseminating research findings. Despite challenges faced in conducting research in LMIC, such as limited resources and sociopolitical instability, opportunities exist to nurture the interest of medical students and surgical trainees in global surgery research. By actively participating in global surgery research, medical students and surgical trainees can contribute to improving healthcare outcomes in LMICs while honing invaluable research skills for their future careers. Global surgery research is a critical area of study aimed at enhancing access to safe and effective surgical care for patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It is essential to explore the significance of global surgery research and highlight the potential contributions of medical students and surgical trainees in addressing the pressing needs of LMIC populations. Global surgery research is pivotal in driving progress and fostering innovation by evaluating surgical disease burden, identifying access barriers, developing sustainable solutions, and strengthening health systems. Additionally, integrating sustainability principles into global surgery research endeavors ensures surgical interventions benefit patients while minimizing the environmental impact of surgical care delivery. Medical students and surgical trainees can engage in global surgery research, including collaborating with experienced researchers, developing research projects with local partners, conducting literature reviews, collecting and analyzing data, and disseminating research findings. Despite challenges faced in conducting research in LMIC, such as limited resources and sociopolitical instability, opportunities exist to nurture the interest of medical students and surgical trainees in global surgery research. By actively participating in global surgery research, medical students and surgical trainees can contribute to improving healthcare outcomes in LMICs while honing invaluable research skills for their future careers. Global surgery research is a critical area of study aimed at enhancing access to safe and effective surgical care for patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It is essential to explore the significance of global surgery research and highlight the potential contributions of medical students and surgical trainees in addressing the pressing needs of LMIC populations. Global surgery research is pivotal in driving progress and fostering innovation by evaluating surgical disease burden, identifying access barriers, developing sustainable solutions, and strengthening health systems. Additionally, integrating sustainability principles into global surgery research endeavors ensures surgical interventions benefit patients while minimizing the environmental impact of surgical care delivery. Medical students and surgical trainees can engage in global surgery research, including collaborating with experienced researchers, developing research projects with local partners, conducting literature reviews, collecting and analyzing data, and disseminating research findings. Despite challenges faced in conducting research in LMIC, such as limited resources and sociopolitical instability, opportunities exist to nurture the interest of medical students and surgical trainees in global surgery research. By actively participating in global surgery research, medical students and surgical trainees can contribute to improving healthcare outcomes in LMICs while honing invaluable research skills for their future careers.

Research prioritisation on prevention and management of preterm birth in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) with a special focus on Bangladesh using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method.

Fifteen million babies are born preterm globally each year, with 81% occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Preterm birth complications are the leading cause of newborn deaths and significantly impact health, quality of life, and costs of health services. Improving outcomes for newborns and their families requires prioritising research for developing practical, scalable solutions, especially in low-resource settings such as Bangladesh. We aimed to identify research priorities related to preventing and managing preterm birth in LMICs for 2021-2030, with a special focus on Bangladesh. We adopted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method to set research priorities for preventing and managing preterm birth. Seventy-six experts submitted 490 research questions online, which we collated into 95 unique questions and sent for scoring to all experts. A hundred and nine experts scored the questions using five pre-selected criteria: answerability, effectiveness, deliverability, maximum potential for burden reduction, and effect on equity. We calculated weighted and unweighted research priority scores and average expert agreement to generate a list of top-ranked research questions for LMICs and Bangladesh. Health systems and policy research dominated the top 20 identified priorities for LMICs, such as understanding and improving uptake of the facility and community-based Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC), promoting breastfeeding, improving referral and transport networks, evaluating the impact of the use of skilled attendants, quality improvement activities, and exploring barriers to antenatal steroid use. Several of the top 20 questions also focused on screening high-risk women or the general population of women, understanding the causes of preterm birth, or managing preterm babies with illnesses (jaundice, sepsis and retinopathy of prematurity). There was a high overlap between research priorities in LMICs and Bangladesh. This exercise, aimed at identifying priorities for preterm birth prevention and management research in LMICs, especially in Bangladesh, found research on improving the care of preterm babies to be more important in reducing the burden of preterm birth and accelerating the attainment of Sustainable Development Goal 3 target of newborn deaths, by 2030.

Tackling the lack of diversity in cancer research.

Despite the clear benefit of studying biological samples from diverse genetic backgrounds and geographical locations, our current knowledge of disease is mostly derived from the study of European-descent individuals. In the cancer field, this is reflected in the poor representation of African and Amerindian/Latino samples in most large public data repositories. This lack of diversity is due to several reasons, but here we focus on (1) the lack of support for studies on non-European populations that are performed in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and (2) unequal partnerships between scientists in LMICs and those in high-income countries. We argue that expanding access to research funding, increasing the participation of underrepresented scientists in editorial boards and international conferences, facilitating the publication of studies conducted in these countries, and properly acknowledging LMIC researchers' contributions in publications and grant applications will promote equity for scientists working in LMICs. We envisage that this will translate to more impactful research in these countries, which will include more samples from diverse populations. For the cancer field, this will broaden our understanding of pathomechanisms and may help to improve the treatment of patients from all backgrounds.

A global health crisis with divided research traditions? A comparative review of Brazilian and international research in communication on the COVID-19 pandemic

ABSTRACT The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in substantial international scientific research from high-income countries, with fewer contributions from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Utilizing a field theory approach, we contend that these output variations may underscore challenges faced by LMIC researchers in obtaining international academic recognition. Through a systematic review of Brazilian and international Communication research during the pandemic, we identify differences in research interests, constructs, methods, and use of academic references. While international literature prioritizes quantitative surveys, Brazil emphasizes qualitative content analysis. We also observe dissimilarities in covered topics and a limited number of shared references. Research traditions and distinct resource allocations pose additional barriers to international publishing, hampering academic exchanges between these communities.

Systematic Review of Procedural Skill Simulation in Health Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have adopted procedural skill simulation, with researchers increasingly investigating simulation efforts in resource-strained settings. We aim to summarize the current state of procedural skill simulation research in LMICs focusing on methodology, clinical area, types of outcomes and cost, cost-effectiveness, and overall sustainability. We performed a comprehensive literature review of original articles that assessed procedural skill simulation from database inception until April 2022.From 5371 screened articles, 262 were included in this review. All included studies were in English. Most studies were observational cohort studies (72.9%) and focused on obstetrics and neonatal medicine (32.4%). Most measured outcome was the process of task performance (56.5%). Several studies mentioned cost (38.9%) or sustainability (29.8%). However, few articles included actual monetary cost information (11.1%); only 1 article assessed cost-effectiveness. Based on our review, future research of procedural skill simulation in LMICS should focus on more rigorous research, cost assessments, and on less studied areas.

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]

Family play, reading, and other stimulation and early childhood development in five low-and-middle-income countries.

This paper used longitudinal data from five studies conducted in Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Ethiopia, and Rwanda to examine the links between family stimulation and early childhood development outcomes (N = 4904; Mage = 51.5; 49% girls). Results from random-effects and more conservative child-fixed effects models indicate that across these studies, family stimulation, measured by caregivers' engagement in nine activities (e.g., reading, playing, singing), predicted increments in children's early numeracy, literacy, social-emotional, motor, and executive function skills (standardized associations ranged from 0.05 to 0.11 SD). Study-specific models showed variability in the estimates, with null associations in two out of the five studies. These findings indicate the need for additional research on culturally specific ways in which caregivers may support early development and highlight the importance of promoting family stimulation to catalyze positive developmental trajectories in global contexts. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: Research on the links between family stimulation and early childhood development in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) is limited. We used longitudinal data from studies conducted in five LMICs to examine the links between family stimulation and early childhood development outcomes. Results suggest that family stimulation predicted increments in children's numeracy, literacy, social-emotional, motor, and executive function skills. We found variability in the observed estimates, with null associations in two out of the five studies, suggesting the need for additional research in LMICs.