Benefits and barriers in a clinical research competency development scheme for low- and middle-income countries.
Training
capacity strengthening
clinical research
evaluation
mentorship
Journal
Global health action
ISSN: 1654-9880
Titre abrégé: Glob Health Action
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101496665
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 12 2022
31 12 2022
Historique:
entrez:
24
3
2022
pubmed:
25
3
2022
medline:
29
3
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The EDCTP-TDR Clinical Research and Development Fellowship (CRDF) scheme has offered one-year clinical research training placements for early- and mid-career researchers from LMIC since 1999. Using the results of a 2018 external evaluation of the CRDF, the current article aims to identify the principal benefits for the main stakeholders of the CRDF scheme as well as the main barriers to accessing these benefits. Data analysis was derived from an external evaluation of the CRDF scheme. Based on a logical framework approach, data for the external evaluation was collected through document review, interviews, focus groups, and questionnaires collected from the main stakeholder groups. The evaluation was structured along six main themes: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability, and equity. The current paper focuses on the expected benefits, unexpected benefits, and barriers to enjoying benefits of the scheme for key stakeholders. Expected benefits were aligned with the development of clinical research competencies, which is the objective of the scheme. Unexpected benefits centred on transferable professional skills in scientific leadership and knowledge translation. Barriers mainly were found around engagement with home institutions and the return and reintegration of fellows following the training period. Recommendations include further engagement with and support for home institutions and developing a formal framework for the development of transferable professional competencies, including leadership and knowledge transfer competencies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The EDCTP-TDR Clinical Research and Development Fellowship (CRDF) scheme has offered one-year clinical research training placements for early- and mid-career researchers from LMIC since 1999.
OBJECTIVE
Using the results of a 2018 external evaluation of the CRDF, the current article aims to identify the principal benefits for the main stakeholders of the CRDF scheme as well as the main barriers to accessing these benefits.
METHOD
Data analysis was derived from an external evaluation of the CRDF scheme. Based on a logical framework approach, data for the external evaluation was collected through document review, interviews, focus groups, and questionnaires collected from the main stakeholder groups. The evaluation was structured along six main themes: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability, and equity.
RESULTS
The current paper focuses on the expected benefits, unexpected benefits, and barriers to enjoying benefits of the scheme for key stakeholders.
DISCUSSION
Expected benefits were aligned with the development of clinical research competencies, which is the objective of the scheme. Unexpected benefits centred on transferable professional skills in scientific leadership and knowledge translation. Barriers mainly were found around engagement with home institutions and the return and reintegration of fellows following the training period.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations include further engagement with and support for home institutions and developing a formal framework for the development of transferable professional competencies, including leadership and knowledge transfer competencies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35322762
doi: 10.1080/16549716.2022.2035504
pmc: PMC8956300
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2035504Références
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016 May 25;10(5):e0004631
pubmed: 27223888
Glob Ment Health (Camb). 2019 Jul 19;6:e16
pubmed: 31391948
F1000Res. 2020 Jun 4;9:517
pubmed: 32595961
BMJ Glob Health. 2017 Mar 30;2(2):e000229
pubmed: 28589027
Lancet Glob Health. 2017 Jun;5(6):e567-e568
pubmed: 28495256
BMJ Open. 2017 Jan 27;7(1):e012332
pubmed: 28131997
BMJ Open. 2017 Oct 13;7(10):e017246
pubmed: 29030412
Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Feb 10;18(1):16
pubmed: 32039738
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Sep;7(9):e1172-e1173
pubmed: 31401998
Health Policy Plan. 2021 Jun 3;36(5):728-739
pubmed: 33661285
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2019 Jan;100(1_Suppl):3-8
pubmed: 30430982
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015 Jan 08;9(1):e3355
pubmed: 25569251
Int J Equity Health. 2018 Mar 22;17(1):37
pubmed: 29566721
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015 Jan 08;9(1):e3380
pubmed: 25569232