Cochrane Africa: a network of evidence-informed health-care decision making across sub-saharan Africa

Activities used by evidence networks to promote evidence-informed decision-making in the health sector- a rapid evidence review

BACKGROUND

Evidence networks facilitate the exchange of information and foster international relationships among researchers and stakeholders. These networks are instrumental in enabling the integration of scientific evidence into decision-making processes. While there is a global emphasis on evidence-based decision-making at policy and organisational levels, there exists a significant gap in our understanding of the most effective activities to exchange scientific knowledge and use it in practice. The objective of this rapid review was to explore the strategies employed by evidence networks to facilitate the translation of evidence into decision-making processes. This review makes a contribution to global health policymaking by mapping the landscape of knowledge translation in this context and identifying the evidence translation activities that evidence networks have found effective.

METHODS

The review was guided by standardised techniques for conducting rapid evidence reviews. Document searching was based on a phased approach, commencing with a comprehensive initial search strategy and progressively refining it with each subsequent search iterations. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was followed.

RESULTS

The review identified 143 articles, after screening 1135 articles. Out of these, 35 articles were included in the review. The studies encompassed a diverse range of countries, with the majority originating from the United States (n = 14), followed by Canada (n = 5), Sweden (n = 2), and various other single locations (n = 14). These studies presented a varied set of implementation strategies such as research-related activities, the creation of teams/task forces/partnerships, meetings/consultations, mobilising/working with communities, influencing policy, activity evaluation, training, trust-building, and regular meetings, as well as community-academic-policymaker engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence networks play a crucial role in developing, sharing, and implementing high-quality research for policy. These networks face challenges like coordinating diverse stakeholders, international collaboration, language barriers, research consistency, knowledge dissemination, capacity building, evaluation, and funding. To enhance their impact, sharing network efforts with wider audiences, including local, national, and international agencies, is essential for evidence-based decision-making to shape evidence-informed policies and programmes effectively.

Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines in Kenya using the AGREE II tool: a methodological review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the quality of available and accessible national Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) in Kenya using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool.

METHODS

We searched the websites of the Kenyan Ministry of Health, professional associations and contacted experts in relevant organisations. Our scope was guidelines on maternal, neonatal, nutritional disorders, injuries, communicable and non-communicable diseases in Kenya published in the last 5 years until 30 June 2022. Study selection and data extraction were done by three independent reviewers with disagreements resolved via discussion or with a senior reviewer. We conducted a quality assessment using the online English version of AGREE II tool across six domains. Descriptive statistics were analysed using Stata software V.17. The primary outcome was the methodological quality of the included CPGs assessed by the AGREE II tool score.

RESULTS

We retrieved 95 CPGs and included 24 in the analysis after screening for eligibility. The CPGs scored best in clarity of presentation and least in the rigour of development. In descending order, the appraisal scores (mean and CI) per domain were as follows: Clarity of presentation 82.96% (95% CI 78.35% to 87.57%) with all guidelines scoring above 50%. Scope and purpose 61.75% (95% CI 54.19% to 69.31%) with seven guidelines scoring less than 50%. Stakeholder involvement 45.25% (95% CI 40.01% to 50.49%) with 16 CPGs scoring less than 50%. Applicability domain 19.88% (95% CI 13.32% to 26.43%) with only one CPG scoring above 50%. Editorial independence 6.92% (95% CI 3.47% to 10.37%) with no CPG scoring above 50% and rigour of development 3% (95% CI 0.61% to 5.39%) with no CPG scoring at least 50%.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that the quality of CPGs in Kenya is limited mainly by the rigour of development, editorial independence, applicability and stakeholder involvement. Training initiatives on evidence-based methodology among guideline developers are needed to improve the overall quality of CPGs for better patient care.

The Cameroon Health Research and Evidence Database (CAMHRED): tools and methods for local evidence mapping

BACKGROUND

Local evidence is important for contextualized knowledge translation. It can be used to adapt global recommendations, to identify future research priorities and inform local policy decisions. However, there are challenges in identifying local evidence in a systematic, comprehensive, and timely manner. There is limited guidance on how to map local evidence and provide it to users in an accessible and user-friendly way. In this study, we address these issues by describing the methods for the development of a centralized database of health research evidence for Cameroon and its applications for research prioritization and decision making.

METHODS

We searched 10 electronic health databases and hand-searched the archives of non-indexed African and Cameroonian journals. We screened titles, abstracts, and full texts of peer reviewed journal articles published between 1999 and 2019 in English or French that assess health related outcomes in Cameroonian populations. We extracted relevant study characteristics based on a pre-established guide. We developed a coding scheme or taxonomy of content areas so that local evidence is mapped to corresponding domains and subdomains. Pairs of reviewers coded articles independently and resolved discrepancies by consensus. Moreover, we developed guidance on how to search the database, use search results to create evidence maps and conduct knowledge gap analyses.

RESULTS

The Cameroon Health Research and Evidence Database (CAMHRED) is a bilingual centralized online portal of local evidence on health in Cameroon from 1999 onwards. It currently includes 4384 studies categorized into content domains and study characteristics (design, setting, year and language of publication). The database is searchable by keywords or through a guided search. Results including abstracts, relevant study characteristics and bibliographic information are available for users to download. Upon request, guidance on how to optimize search results for applications like evidence maps and knowledge gap analyses is also available.

CONCLUSIONS

CAMHRED ( https://camhred.org/ ) is a systematic, comprehensive, and centralized resource for local evidence about health in Cameroon. It is freely available to stakeholders and provides an additional resource to support their work at various levels in the research process.

Publication practices of sub-Saharan African Cochrane authors: a bibliometric study

INTRODUCTION

Cochrane Africa (https://africa.cochrane.org/) aims to increase Cochrane reviews addressing high priority questions in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Researchers residing in SSA, despite often drawing on Cochrane methods, training or resources, conduct and publish systematic reviews outside of Cochrane. Our objective was to investigate the extent to which Cochrane authors from SSA publish Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews.

METHODS

We conducted a bibliometric study of systematic reviews and overviews of systematic reviews from SSA, first by identifying SSA Cochrane authors, then retrieving their first and last author systematic reviews and overviews from PubMed (2008 to April 2019) and using descriptive analyses to investigate the country of origin, types of reviews and trends in publishing Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews over time. To be eligible, a review had to have predetermined objectives, eligibility criteria, at least two databases searched, data extraction, quality assessment and a first or last author with a SSA affiliation.

RESULTS

We identified 657 Cochrane authors and 757 eligible systematic reviews. Most authors were from South Africa (n=332; 51%), followed by Nigeria (n=126; 19%). Three-quarters of the reviews (71%) were systematic reviews of interventions. The intervention reviews were more likely to be Cochrane reviews (60.3% vs 39.7%). Conversely, the overviews (23.8% vs 76.2%), qualitative reviews (14.8% vs 85.2%), diagnostic test accuracy reviews (16.1% vs 83.9%) and the 'other' reviews (11.1% vs 88.9%) were more likely to be non-Cochrane reviews. During the study period, the number of non-Cochrane reviews increased more than the number of Cochrane reviews. About a quarter of the reviews covered infectious disease topics.

CONCLUSION

Cochrane authors from SSA are increasingly publishing a diverse variety of systematic reviews and overviews of systematic reviews, often opting for non-Cochrane journals.

Collaboration on evidence synthesis in Africa: a network study of growing research capacity

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based practice in medicine and social policy relies heavily on evidence synthesis. To translate evidence into practical guidelines for low- and middle-income countries, local expertise is essential. The objectives of this study are to assess the change in capacity for conducting evidence synthesis in Africa and to identify key African institutions for regional capacity-building. We take on a network perspective, considering that the position of an institution in the African evidence ecosystem is one constituent of its research capacity.

METHODS

We systematically identified 3548 evidence synthesis publications between 2008 and 2019 with at least one author in Africa from the Web of Science Core Collection. These articles involved 3769 institutions. Longitudinal institution-level collaboration network data were constructed based on co-authorship information. We used social network analysis to examine the institutions' connectivity and tendency for intra- and interregional collaboration. We also identified the degree- and betweenness-central African institutions and explored the structure and composition of their local network neighbourhoods.

RESULTS

The number of African institutions involved in evidence synthesis has increased substantially over the last decade, from 31 in 2008 to 521 in 2019, and so has the number of evidence synthesis publications with authors in Africa. African institutions in the evidence ecosystem have also become more connected during this period. Although the amount of intercontinental collaboration continues to exceed that of regional collaboration, the tendency for African institutions to collaborate with partners in Africa is increasing. We identified seven institutions-in South Africa, Egypt and Uganda-as central to the collaboration networks between 2008 and 2019, all of whom showed a tendency to collaborate across sectors.

CONCLUSION

The development of more regionally based network-building initiatives would help to foster communities of practice and inter-institutional collaboration, strengthening regional research capacity. Moreover, the analysis in this study adds depth beyond a simple bibliometric analysis and illustrates that network analysis could provide a useful tool to evaluate the effectiveness of capacity-building strategies and programmes in the future.

Priority setting for new systematic reviews: processes and lessons learned in three regions in Africa

Priority setting to identify topical and context relevant questions for systematic reviews involves an explicit, iterative and inclusive process. In resource-constrained settings of low-income and middle-income countries, priority setting for health related research activities ensures efficient use of resources. In this paper, we critically reflect on the approaches and specific processes adopted across three regions of Africa, present some of the outcomes and share the lessons learnt while carrying out these activities. Priority setting for new systematic reviews was conducted between 2016 and 2018 across three regions in Africa. Different approaches were used: Multimodal approach (Central Africa), Modified Delphi approach (West Africa) and Multilevel stakeholder discussion (Southern-Eastern Africa). Several questions that can feed into systematic reviews have emerged from these activities. We have learnt that collaborative subregional efforts using an integrative approach can effectively lead to the identification of region specific priorities. Systematic review workshops including discussion about the role and value of reviews to inform policy and research agendas were a useful part of the engagements. This may also enable relevant stakeholders to contribute towards the priority setting process in meaningful ways. However, certain shared challenges were identified, including that emerging priorities may be overlooked due to differences in burden of disease data and differences in language can hinder effective participation by stakeholders. We found that face-to-face contact is crucial for success and follow-up engagement with stakeholders is critical in driving acceptance of the findings and planning future progress.

Revisiting public health programming in Nigeria: challenges and solutions

Public health programming has three main components – capacity development, service provision and documentation with monitoring. However, most funders and programmers now focus on just documentation and monitoring. In this communication, the authors extensively discuss the need for the full complement of public health programming and why it is important to restructure supportive site visits to make them both empowering and impactful to the health care workers resulting in higher quality of public health services and documentation with monitoring. The authors are of the view that following problem identification, comprehensive capacity development of field workers will engender quality service provision and appropriate documentation and monitoring.