Login / Signup

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

Justin PulfordSusie CrossmanPierre AbomoJessica Amegee QuachSara BeggYan DingTaghreed El HajjImelda Bates
Published in: BMJ global health (2021)
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.
Keyphrases
  • randomized controlled trial
  • quality improvement
  • primary care
  • healthcare
  • physical activity
  • study protocol
  • decision making
  • mental health
  • clinical trial
  • climate change
  • double blind