Search

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.

Science education and research have the potential to drive profound change in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) through encouraging innovation, attracting industry, and creating job opportunities. However, in LMICs, research capacity is often limited, and acquisition of funding and access to state-of-the-art technologies is challenging. The Alliance for Global Health and Science (the Alliance) was founded as a partnership between the University of California, Berkeley (USA) and Makerere University (Uganda), with the goal of strengthening Makerere University's capacity for bioscience research. The flagship program of the Alliance partnership is the MU/UCB Biosciences Training Program, an in-country, hands-on workshop model that trains a large number of students from Makerere University in infectious disease and molecular biology research. This approach nucleates training of larger and more diverse groups of students, development of mentoring and bi-directional research partnerships, and support of the local economy. Here, we describe the project, its conception, implementation, challenges, and outcomes of bioscience research workshops. We aim to provide a blueprint for workshop implementation, and create a valuable resource for bioscience research capacity strengthening in LMICs.

Functional neurosurgery techniques remain integral to the neurosurgical treatment armamentarium but data on global implementation remains scarce. In comparison to high-income countries (HIC), low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) suffer from an increased prevalence of diseases like epilepsy, which may be amenable to functional techniques, and therefore, LMIC may benefit from an increased utilization of these treatment modalities. However, functional techniques tend to be expensive and thus difficult to implement in the LMIC setting. A review was performed to assess the current status of functional neurosurgical techniques in LMIC as a starting point for future initiatives. For methodology, a review of the current body of literature on functional neurosurgery in LMIC was conducted through the United States National Library of Medicine Pubmed search engine. Search terms included "functional neurosurgery," "developing countries," "low and middle income," and other related terms. It was found that though five billion people lack access to safe surgical care, the burden of disease amenable to treatment with functional neurosurgical procedures remains unknown. Increasingly, reports of successful, long-term, international neurosurgical collaborations are being reported, but reports in the sub-field of functional neurosurgery are lacking. In conclusion, awareness of global surgical disparities has increased dramatically while global guidelines for functional techniques are currently lacking. A concerted effort can harness these techniques for wider practice. Partnerships between centers in LMIC and HIC are making progress to better understand the burden of disease in LMIC and to create context-specific solutions for practice in the LMIC setting, but more collaborations are warranted.

BackgroundGlobal health academic partnerships are centered around a core tension: they often mirror or reproduce the very cross-national inequities they seek to alleviate. On the one hand, they risk worsening power dynamics that perpetuate health disparities; on the other, they form an essential response to the need for healthcare resources to reach marginalized populations across the globe.ObjectivesThis study characterizes the broader landscape of global health academic partnerships, including challenges to developing ethical, equitable, and sustainable models. It then lays out guiding principles of the specific partnership approach, and considers how lessons learned might be applied in other resource-limited settings.MethodsThe experience of a partnership between the Ministry of Health in Nepal, the non-profit healthcare provider Possible, and the Health Equity Action and Leadership Initiative at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine was reviewed. The quality and effectiveness of the partnership was assessed using the Tropical Health and Education Trust Principles of Partnership framework.ResultsVarious strategies can be taken by partnerships to better align the perspectives of patients and public sector providers with those of expatriate physicians. Actions can also be taken to bring greater equity to the wealth and power gaps inherent within global health academic partnerships.ConclusionsThis study provides recommendations gleaned from the analysis, with an aim towards both future refinement of the partnership and broader applications of its lessons and principles. It specifically highlights the importance of targeted engagements with academic medical centers and the need for efficient organizational work-flow practices. It considers how to both prioritize national and host institution goals, and meet the career development needs of global health clinicians.

Enhancing health research capacity in developing countries is a global health priority. Understanding the orthopedic burden of disease in Latin America will require close partnership between more-developed and less-developed countries. To this end, the Osteosynthesis and Trauma Care Foundation assembled a research consortium of Latin-American orthopedic leaders. Prior to the meeting, we surveyed attendees on perceived barriers to conducting research at their institutions. During the event, working groups discussed these barriers, developed strategies for addressing them, and planned future steps for collaboration. The participants established the need for global relationships that allow colleagues from Latin America to access to training and established investigational infrastructure of North American centers to address research questions relevant to their communities. As a result of the discussion, the International Orthopaedic Multicenter Study (INORMUS) in Fracture Care was initiated. Since then, an expanded international working group, Associación de Cirujanos Traumatológicos en las Americas (ACTUAR), has been created with the purpose of promoting increased global partnership for research capacity development.

BackgroundDespite the recent explosion of the mobile health (mHealth) industry and consumer acquisition of mHealth tools such as wearable sensors and applications (apps), limited information is known about how this technology can sustain health behavior change and be integrated into health care.ObjectiveThe objective of the study was to understand potential users' views of mHealth technology, the role this technology may have in promoting individual activity goals aimed at improving health, and the value of integrating mHealth technology with traditional health care.MethodsFour focus groups were conducted with adults interested in sharing their views on how mHealth technology could support wellness programs and improve health. Participants (n=30) were enrolled from an employee population at an academic health institution. Qualitative thematic analysis was used to code transcripts and identify overarching themes.ResultsOur findings suggest that tracking health data alone may result in heightened awareness of daily activity, yet may not be sufficient to sustain use of mHealth technology and apps, which often have low reuse rates. Participants suggested that context, meaning, and health care partnerships need to be incorporated to engage and retain users. In addition to these findings, drivers for mHealth technology previously identified in the literature, including integration and control of health data were confirmed in this study.ConclusionsThis study explores ways that mHealth technologies may be used to not only track data, but to encourage sustained engagement to achieve individual health goals. Implications of these findings include recommendations for mHealth technology design and health care partnership models to sustain motivation and engagement, allowing individuals to achieve meaningful behavior change.

The global disparities in both surgical disease burden and access to delivery of surgical care are gaining prominence in the medical literature and media. Concurrently, there is an unprecedented groundswell in idealism and interest in global health among North American medical students and trainees in anesthesia and surgical disciplines. Many academic medical centers (AMCs) are seeking to respond by creating partnerships with teaching hospitals overseas. In this article we describe six such partnerships, as follows: (1) University of California San Francisco (UCSF) with the Bellagio Essential Surgery Group; (2) USCF with Makerere University, Uganda; (3) Vanderbilt with Baptist Medical Center, Ogbomoso, Nigeria; (4) Vanderbilt with Kijabe Hospital, Kenya; (5) University of Toronto, Hospital for Sick Children with the Ministry of Health in Botswana; and (6) Harvard (Brigham and Women's Hospital and Children's Hospital Boston) with Partners in Health in Haiti and Rwanda. Reflection on these experiences offers valuable lessons, and we make recommendations of critical components leading to success. These include the importance of relationships, emphasis on mutual learning, the need for "champions," affirming that local training needs to supersede expatriate training needs, the value of collaboration in research, adapting the mission to locally expressed needs, the need for a multidisciplinary approach, and the need to measure outcomes. We conclude that this is an era of cautious optimism and that AMCs have a critical opportunity to both shape future leaders in global surgery and address the current global disparities.

BackgroundImplementation of evidence-based mental health assessment and intervention in community public health practice is a high priority for multiple stakeholders. Academic-community partnerships can assist in the implementation of efficacious treatments in community settings; yet, little is known about the processes by which these collaborations are developed. In this paper, we discuss our application of community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach to implementation, and we present six lessons we have learned from the establishment of an academic-community partnership.MethodsWith older adults with psychosis as a focus, we have developed a partnership between a university research center and a public mental health service system based on CBPR. The long-term goal of the partnership is to collaboratively establish an evidence-based implementation network that is sustainable within the public mental healthcare system.ResultsIn building a sustainable partnership, we found that the following lessons were instrumental: changing attitudes; sharing staff; expecting obstacles and formalizing solutions; monitoring and evaluating; adapting and adjusting; and taking advantage of emerging opportunities. Some of these lessons were previously known principles that were modified as the result of the CBPR process, while some lessons derived directly from the interactive process of forming the partnership.ConclusionThe process of forming of academic-public partnerships is challenging and time consuming, yet crucial for the development and implementation of state-of-the-art approaches to assessment and interventions to improve the functioning and quality of life for persons with serious mental illnesses. These partnerships provide necessary organizational support to facilitate the implementation of clinical research findings in community practice benefiting consumers, researchers, and providers.

This paper reviews the current status of the global pharmaceutical industry and its research and development focus in the context of the health care needs of the developing world. It will consider the attempts to improve access to critical drugs and vaccines, and increase the research effort directed at key public health priorities in the developing world. In particular, it will consider prospects for public-private collaboration. The challenges and opportunities in such public-private partnerships will be discussed briefly along with a look at factors that may be key to success. Much of the focus is on HIV/AIDS where the debate on the optimal balance between intellectual property rights (IPR) and human rights to life and health has been very public and emotive.