Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Mar;6(3):e005153.
doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005153.

Guidance and conceptual tools to inform the design, selection and evaluation of research capacity strengthening interventions

Justin Pulford  1 , Susie Crossman  2 , Pierre Abomo  2 , Jessica Amegee Quach  2 , Sara Begg  2 , Yan Ding  2 , Taghreed El Hajj  2 , Imelda Bates  2
Affiliations
Review

Guidance and conceptual tools to inform the design, selection and evaluation of research capacity strengthening interventions

Justin Pulford et al. BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Mar.

Abstract

This practice note presents four conceptual tools intended to support the design, selection and evaluation of research capacity strengthening (RCS) programmes in low-income and middle-income country settings. The tools may be used by a wide range of RCS stakeholders, including funders, implementing parties and programme evaluators, to guide decision-making in lieu of largely as yet unavailable empirical evidence. The first conceptual tool guides decision-making regarding RCS intervention design, focusing specifically on the combination and integration of potential intervention activities. The second conceptual tool provides a framework for assessing the implementation challenges of potential RCS interventions in terms of: (1) the overall cost of implementing the proposed intervention in a given context; (2) the length of time required to complete full implementation of the proposed intervention in a given context and (3) the level of control the implementing partners would have over the proposed intervention in a given context. The third conceptual tool provides a means to consider the anticipated impact of potential RCS interventions in order to inform selection decisions (ie, which out of a number of potential RCS intervention options may be most impactful in a given setting given the intervention design and implementation challenges). The fourth and final tool is designed to support the evaluation of a collective RCS effort, whether that be multiple RCS interventions delivered within the context of a single or continuous programme or multiple RCS programmes delivered in a common setting.

Keywords: health policies and all other topics; study design.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Research capacity strengthening intervention activities and their potential configuration.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Assessing the relative complexity of implementing a research capacity strengthening intervention according to cost, time and control.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Research capacity strengthening interventions plotted by configuration, implementation complexity and anticipated impact.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Plotting the collective research capacity strengthening (RCS) effort.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kilmarx PH, Maitin T, Adam T, et al. . A mechanism for reviewing investments in health research capacity strengthening in low- and middle-income countries. Ann Glob Health 2020;86:92. 10.5334/aogh.2941 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. COHRED . Health research: essential link to equity in development. Commission on Health Research for Development: Oxford; 1990.
    1. Gregorius S, Dean L, Cole DC, et al. . The peer review process for awarding funds to international science research consortia: a qualitative developmental evaluation. F1000Res 2017;6:6. 10.12688/f1000research.12496.3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Franzen SRP, Chandler C, Lang T. Health research capacity development in low and middle income countries: reality or rhetoric? A systematic meta-narrative review of the qualitative literature. BMJ Open 2017;7:e012332. 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012332 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dean L, Gregorius S, Bates I, et al. . Advancing the science of health research capacity strengthening in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review of the published literature, 2000-2016. BMJ Open 2017;7:e018718. 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018718 - DOI - PMC - PubMed