Search

To fill the gap in health research capacity-building efforts, we created the 'Virtual Library' (VL) – a web-based repository of context-relevant resources for health researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This paper describes the participatory process used to systematically develop the VL, and describes how our interprofessional team – representing both an LMIC (Nepal) and a high-income country (HIC) (USA, US) – engaged in shared meaning-making. A team of researchers and clinicians representing a range of subdisciplines from Nepal and the US created a replicable search strategy and standardized Resource Screening Guide (RSG) to systematically assess resources to be included within the VL. Descriptive methods were used to summarize findings from the RSG and lessons learned from the collaborative process. Collectively, 14 team members reviewed 564 potential resources (mean = 40, SD = 22.7). Mean RSG score was 7.02/10 (SD = 2). More than 76% of resources met each of the four quality criteria (relevant; reputable, accessible; understandable). Within the published VL, 298 resources were included, organized by 15 topics and 45 sub-topics. Of these, 223 resources were evaluated by the RSG; 75 were identified by team member expertise. The collaborative process involved regular meetings, iterative document revisions, and peer review. Resource quality was better than expected, perhaps because best practices/principles related to health research are universally relevant, regardless of context. While the RSG was essential to systematize our search and ensure reproducibility, team member expertise was valuable. Pairing team members during peer-review led to bi-directional knowledge sharing and was particularly successful. This work reflects a highly collaborative global partnership and offers a model for future health research capacity-building efforts. We invite engagement with the Virtual Library <> as one supportive pillar of infrastructure to develop individual and institutional research capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction The International Family Medicine Clinic (IFMC) was established in 2002 by the University of Virginia Department of Family Medicine to provide comprehensive, timely, culturally sensitive and high-quality healthcare to the growing refugee and special immigrant population in Central Virginia, USA. Methods The purpose of this paper is to describe the IFMC, with a specific focus on interprofessional roles, interprofessional collaboration, community partnerships and the services and resources available to IFMC patients. Results The clinic has served over 3100 refugees from 60 countries in its 16-year history. In 2019, the clinic staff now includes 4 attending physicians, 2 nurse practitioners and 14 residents who have dedicated clinic time to see refugees; a registered nurse care coordinator and a social worker dedicated to the IFMC refugee population; 2 clinical psychologists and doctoral students in clinical psychology; and a clinical pharmacist. The IFMC also provides onsite psychiatric care. A process flow map depicts the interconnectivity of interprofessional team members working together with other specialty care providers within the medical centre and with community partners on behalf of refugee patients through the resettlement process. Conclusion Individuals who arrive in the USA as refugees are a particularly vulnerable patient group and often require an interprofessional team approach. The IFMC may serve as a model for other institutions interested in starting a similar interprofessional, refugee-centred medical home. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Equitable global health partnerships are essential to promote innovative research and strengthen research capacity to address critical public health challenges, but how to optimally evaluate such collaborations is unclear. This was a sequential, multi-method study that utilized an electronic survey informed by the literature followed by semi-structured interviews to comprehensively evaluate the experience of participating in a global research-capacity building collaboration between Nepal and U.S. clinicians and investigators. De-identified quantitative survey were analyzed to calculate descriptive and summary statistics, along with crosstabs of each variable by group. Groups were defined based on country-of-origin and Chi Square statistics calculated to assess for statistically significant differences (p<0.05) between groups. Interviews were analyzed using a descriptive qualitative approach to develop an overall thematic map. 22 survey responses (52.4% response rate) were analyzed; 13 (59.1%) from Nepal, 9 (40.9%) from the U.S. Eight participants (4 Nepal; 4 U.S.) were interviewed. Over the course of the project, all participants reported gaining experience and confidence with research. The majority of participants "strongly agreed" there was a shared understanding of goals, priorities and strategies (Nepal, 58.3%, n = 7; U.S., 88.9%, n = 8;) and that power was shared equally (Nepal, 58.3%, n = 7; U.S., 55.6%, n = 5). The over-arching theme that emerged from the interviews was the importance of 'establishing community' which participants discussed within the broader context of COVID-19. Overall, team members reported strong bi-directional benefit and a greater emphasis on perceived benefits versus challenges. Our survey tool and interview guide, designed to holistically evaluate the impact of a global partnership across various levels of the Social Ecological Model, with particular attention to power dynamics and equity, can be adapted and used by others engaged in similar research capacity collaborations., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Amos et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)