Search

The burden of malnutrition experienced globally, coupled with the increasing rate of micronutrient deficiencies, compromises the health and well-being of women during their reproductive years. Obesity places young South African women at particular risk during pregnancy, and increases obesity risk for their offspring. To address these risks, the Bukhali trial is being implemented in Soweto, South Africa with 18–28-year-old women, as part of the Healthy Lifestyle Trajectory Initiative. A dietitian is part of the Bukhali intervention team (community health workers) to provide nutritional support for overweight/obese trial participants, making use of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) Nutrition Checklist. This paper reflects on the experiences and lessons learned by the Bukhali dietitian, including the use of the FIGO Nutrition Checklist and Healthy Conversation Skills to facilitate conversations about making healthy dietary behaviour changes. Identified challenges that influence nutrition and behaviour are discussed, including lack of food affordability, cultural and social influences on healthy food choices, unsupportive environments and food insecurity. Strategies to optimise this nutritional support are also mentioned. The Bukhali trial is showing that introducing additional nutrition support by a dietitian for at-risk participants has the potential to encourage young women to prioritise nutrition and health, even in the midst of contextual challenges to both nutrition and health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Building fair, equitable, and beneficial partnerships between institutions collaborating in research in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) and high-income countries (HIC) has become an integral part of research capacity building in global health in recent years. In this paper, we offer an example of an academic collaboration between the University of California Los Angeles, Center for Health Policy and Research (UCLA CHPR) and the University of Philippines, Manila, College of Public Health (UPM CPH) that sought to build an equitable partnership between research institutions. The partnership was built on a project to build capacity for research and produce data for policy action for the prevention and care of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) through primary healthcare in the Philippines. The specific objectives of the project were to: (1) locally adapt the Primary Care Assessment Tool for the Philippines and use the adapted tool to measure facility-level primary care delivery, (2) conduct focus group discussions (FGDs) to gather qualitative observations regarding primary care readiness and capacity, and (3) conduct a comprehensive population-based health survey among adults on NCDs and prior healthcare experience. We describe here the progression of the partnership between these institutions to carry out the project and the elements that helped build a stronger connection between the institutions, such as mutual goal setting, cultural bridging, collaborative teams, and capacity building. This example, which can be used as a model depicting new directionality and opportunities for LMIC-HIC academic partnerships, was written based on the review of shared project documents, including study protocols, and written and oral communications with the project team members, including the primary investigators. The innovation of this partnership includes: LMIC-initiated project need identification, LMIC-based funding allocation, a capacity-building role of the HIC institution, and the expansion of scope through jointly offered courses on global health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge production is an important factor in establishing the geopolitical position of countries. In the recent heated discussion on predatory publishing, the geopolitical dimension of this topic is often ignored or treated superficially. In this paper, we introduce the term "mislocated centres of scholarly communication" to help better understand the emergence of predatory journals, and journals that bear similarities to them, in geopolitical peripheries. Mislocated centers of scholarly communication are perceived in the peripheries as legitimized by the center but are in fact invisible or illegitimate in the center. Thus, we argue the importance of viewing these mislocated centers as the result of unequal power relations in academia. To support our argument, we summarize the research on the topic of predatory publishing and demonstrate that predatory journals are a geopolitical problem because the geopolitical peripheries of science are much more often harmed by them than the center. Unlike predatory journals, mislocated centers of scholarly communication are not necessarily fraudulent but rather they are geopolitical roles imposed on some journals by a dynamic between center and peripheries. Our approach could help to criticize this system without discriminating against peripheral scholars or journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]