Dataset Information

A systematic review on academic research productivity of postgraduate students in low- and middle-income countries.

ABSTRACT:

Background

While several individual studies addressing research productivity of post-graduate students are available, a synthesis of effective strategies to increase productivity and the determinants of productivity in low-income countries has not been undertaken. Further, whether or not this research from post-graduate students' projects was applied in evidence-informed decision-making was unknown. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of literature to identify and assess the effectiveness of approaches that increase productivity (proportion published) or the application (proportion cited) of post-graduate students' research, as well as to assess the determinants of post-graduate students' research productivity and use.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review as per our a priori published protocol, also registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016042819). We searched for published articles in PubMed/MEDLINE and the ERIC databases through to July 2017. We performed duplicate assessments for included primary studies and resolved discrepancies by consensus. Thereafter, we completed a structured narrative synthesis and, for a subset of studies, we performed a meta-analysis of the findings using both fixed and random effects approaches. We aligned our results to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.

Results

We found 5080 articles in the PubMed (n = 3848) and ERIC (n = 1232) databases. After excluding duplicates (n = 33), we screened 5047 articles, of which 5012 were excluded. We then retrieved 44 full texts and synthesised 14, of which 4 had a high risk of bias. We did not find any studies assessing effectiveness of strategies for increasing publication nor citations of post-graduate research projects. We found an average publication proportion of 7% (95% CI 7-8%, Higgins I-squared 0.0% and Cochran's Q p < 0.01) and 23% (95% CI 17-29%, Higgins I-squared of 98.4% and Cochran's Q, p < 0.01) using fixed effects and random effects models, respectively. Two studies reported on the citation of post-graduate students' studies, at 17% (95% CI 15-19%) in Uganda and a median citation of 1 study in Turkey (IQR 0.6-2.3). Only one included study reported on the determinants of productivity or use of post-graduate students' research, suggesting that younger students were more likely to publish and cohort studies were more likely to be published.

Conclusions

We report on the low productivity of post-graduate students' research in low- and middle-income countries, including the citation of post-graduate students' research in evidence-informed health policy in low- and middle-income countries. Secondly, we did not find a single study that assessed strategies to increase productivity and use of post-graduate students' research in evidence-informed health policy, a subject for future research.

SUBMITTER: Obuku EA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6114801 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A systematic review on academic research productivity of postgraduate students in low- and middle-income countries.

Obuku E A EA Lavis J N JN Kinengyere A A Ssenono R R Ocan M M Mafigiri D K DK Ssengooba F F Karamagi C C Sewankambo N K NK

Health research policy and systems 20180828 1

<h4>Background</h4>While several individual studies addressing research productivity of post-graduate students are available, a synthesis of effective strategies to increase productivity and the determinants of productivity in low-income countries has not been undertaken. Further, whether or not this research from post-graduate students' projects was applied in evidence-informed decision-making was unknown. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of literature to identify and assess the effe ...[more]

PMID: 30153837

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Effective and scalable strategies are needed to develop health research capacity in low- and middle‑income countries (LMICs). Health research capacity strengthening (HRCS) focuses on boosting production and utilization of health research, with clinicians as key target participants. Despite the increased prevalence of virtual HRCS programs, there has been no review of the evidence for those targeting LMIC clinicians to date. Objective: This review characterizes the use of virtual tools in HRCS programs for clinicians in LMICs and describes the impacts, facilitators, and barriers associated with these programs. Methods: Following our protocol (PROSPERO; CRD42020152510), we employed an integrative review methodology. We adapted Cooke's Research Capacity Development for Impact framework by adding "equity" as a new domain and used it to evaluate programmatic impacts. We retrieved relevant articles from five databases and gray literature. Included articles were extracted and stratified by degree of virtual delivery. We analyzed virtual tool usage via content analysis. Using NVivo, we coded until theoretical saturation and analyzed data using the constant comparison method. Findings: From 1397 articles, 58 met inclusion criteria. Most programs were hybrid, and e‑courses were the most used virtual tool. Articles described impacts across all framework domains; the most discussed were skills and confidence building. Facilitators included user‑friendly platforms, interactive content, and strategies to improve program access, including financial and technological support. Some programs incorporated hybrid strategies to foster trust among participants and virtual mentors. Barriers included a lack of or an unfavorable local research culture. Conclusions: Recommendations from this review may guide the design and implementation of virtual HRCS programs for LMIC clinicians. These include selecting well‑fitted program participants, intentionally designing program structure and content, conducting needs assessments or pilots, incorporating equity as a programmatic target, ensuring longitudinal program evaluation and monitoring, and utilizing a comprehensive conceptualization of program sustainability.

Project description:BackgroundRoutine health information systems (RHISs) support resource allocation and management decisions at all levels of the health system, as well as strategy development and policy-making in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Although RHIS data represent a rich source of information, such data are currently underused for research purposes, largely due to concerns over data quality. Given that substantial investments have been made in strengthening RHISs in LMICs in recent years, and that there is a growing demand for more real-time data from researchers, this systematic review builds upon the existing literature to summarize the extent to which RHIS data have been used in peer-reviewed research publications.MethodsUsing terms 'routine health information system', 'health information system', or 'health management information system' and a list of LMICs, four electronic peer-review literature databases were searched from inception to February 202,019: PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and EconLit. Articles were assessed for inclusion based on pre-determined eligibility criteria and study characteristics were extracted from included articles using a piloted data extraction form.ResultsWe identified 132 studies that met our inclusion criteria, originating in 37 different countries. Overall, the majority of the studies identified were from Sub-Saharan Africa and were published within the last 5 years. Malaria and maternal health were the most commonly studied health conditions, although a number of other health conditions and health services were also explored.ConclusionsOur study identified an increasing use of RHIS data for research purposes, with many studies applying rigorous study designs and analytic methods to advance program evaluation, monitoring and assessing services, and epidemiological studies in LMICs. RHIS data represent an underused source of data and should be made more available and further embraced by the research community in LMIC health systems.

Dataset Information

A systematic review on academic research productivity of postgraduate students in low- and middle-income countries.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A systematic review on academic research productivity of postgraduate students in low- and middle-income countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets