Low-cost peer-taught virtual research workshops for medical students in Pakistan: a creative, scalable, and sustainable solution for student research

Health research mentorship in low-income and middle-income countries: a global qualitative evidence synthesis of data from a crowdsourcing open call and scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Research mentorship is critical for advancing science, but there are few practical strategies for cultivating mentorship in health research resource-limited settings. WHO/TDR Global commissioned a group to develop a practical guide on research mentorship. This global qualitative evidence synthesis included data from a crowdsourcing open call and scoping review to identify and propose strategies to enhance research mentorship in low/middle-income country (LMIC) institutions.

METHODS

The crowdsourcing open call used methods recommended by WHO/TDR and solicited descriptions of strategies to enhance research mentorship in LMICs. The scoping review used the Cochrane Handbook and predefined the approach in a protocol. We extracted studies focused on enhancing health research mentorship in LMICs. Textual data describing research mentorship strategies from the open call and studies from the scoping review were coded into themes. The quality of evidence supporting themes was assessed using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach.

RESULTS

The open call solicited 46 practical strategies and the scoping review identified 77 studies. We identified the following strategies to enhance research mentorship: recognising mentorship as an institutional responsibility that should be provided and expected from all team members (8 strategies, 15 studies; moderate confidence); leveraging existing research and training resources to enhance research mentorship (15 strategies, 49 studies; moderate confidence); digital tools to match mentors and mentees and sustain mentorship relations over time (14 strategies, 11 studies; low confidence); nurturing a culture of generosity so that people who receive mentorship then become mentors to others (7 strategies, 7 studies; low confidence); peer mentorship defined as informal and formal support from one researcher to another who is at a similar career stage (16 strategies, 12 studies; low confidence).

INTERPRETATION

Research mentorship is a collective institutional responsibility, and it can be strengthened in resource-limited institutions by leveraging already existing resources. The evidence from the crowdsourcing open call and scoping review informed a WHO/TDR practical guide. There is a need for more formal research mentorship programmes in LMIC institutions.

Health research mentorship in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this scoping review was to explore and synthesize the available literature on health research mentorship in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

INTRODUCTION

Research mentorship is broadly considered a useful strategy to improve research capacities and research outputs. Existing literature and guidance on research mentorship have focused on high-income countries and assumed resource-rich environments. Despite the successful endeavors to improve health research capacity in LMICs, the strategies that work best under different circumstances are poorly understood. There is a need to map and understand the evidence on health research mentorship in the context of LMICs.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Sources that reported existing practices, barriers, and mitigation strategies related to health research mentorship in LMICs were included.

METHODS

We searched for published and unpublished studies and reports written in English, Spanish, or Portuguese. The search strategy was not limited by search dates and the last search was conducted on January 28, 2022. The databases searched included MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and JBI Evidence Synthesis . We also searched for gray literature in a selection of websites and digital repositories. The JBI scoping review methodology was used.

RESULTS

A total of 77 studies and reports were included in the review. The majority of the papers were from Africa (n=28). Others were from the Americas (n=7), South East Asia (n=4), East Mediterranean (n=2), and Western Pacific (n=2). The remaining studies were from LMICs that included at least 2 regional offices. Most of the mentorship projects (n=55) were initiated and funded by institutions from high-income countries. The first authors of 41 papers were primarily affiliated with LMICs. The findings were categorized under a description of research mentorship practices, barriers related to research mentorship, and suggested mitigation strategies. Deliverable-driven training using intensive hands-on mentorship and ongoing peer mentorship programs were some of the non-regular, non-institutionalized approaches used to improve research capacity for junior researchers in LMICs. None of the included papers focused on institutional components of research mentorship in LMICs. The barriers to research mentorship activities in LMICs included lack of clarity on mentorship, cultural variations, unbalanced power dynamics, socio-political influences, language barriers, lack of experienced mentors, and limited local funding. Institutionalizing research mentorship, adapting mentoring methodologies relying on local resources, and addressing and respecting diversity in mentorship programs were among the main strategies identified to effectively implement research mentorship in LMICs.

CONCLUSIONS

Research mentorship initiatives and practices are limited in LMICs. Few available practices have been introduced by researchers and research institutions from high-income countries and those that have are not yet institutionalized. The identified existing practices, barriers, and facilitators on health research mentorship could help the design, implementation, and evaluation of programs to institutionalize health research mentorship in LMICs.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework osf.io/jqa9z/.

SUPPLEMENTAL DIGITAL CONTENT

A Spanish-language version of the abstract of this review is available as supplemental digital content: http://links.lww.com/SRX/A32.

Design and Transition of an Emergency E-Learning Pathology Course for Medical Students-Evaluation of a Novel Course Concept

BACKGROUND

Around the world, the emergency brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic forced medical schools to create numerous e-learning supplements to provide instruction during this crisis. The question now is to determine a way in which to capitalize on this momentum of digitization and harness the medical e-learning content created for the future. We have analyzed the transition of a pathology course to an emergency remote education online course and, in the second step, applied a flipped classroom approach including research skills training.

METHODS

In the summer semester of 2020, the pathology course at the Technical University of Munich was completely converted to an asynchronous online course. Its content was adapted in winter 2021 and incorporated into a flipped classroom concept in which research skills were taught at the same time.

RESULTS

Screencasts and lecture recordings were the most popular asynchronous teaching formats. Students reported developing a higher interest in pathology and research through group work. The amount of content was very challenging for some students.

CONCLUSION

Flipped classroom formats are a viable option when using pre-existing content. We recommend checking such content for technical and didactic quality and optimizing it if necessary. Content on research skills can be combined very well with clinical teaching content.

Workshop-based learning and networking: a scalable model for research capacity strengthening in low- and middle-income countries

Science education and research have the potential to drive profound change in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) through encouraging innovation, attracting industry, and creating job opportunities. However, in LMICs, research capacity is often limited, and acquisition of funding and access to state-of-the-art technologies is challenging. The Alliance for Global Health and Science (the Alliance) was founded as a partnership between the University of California, Berkeley (USA) and Makerere University (Uganda), with the goal of strengthening Makerere University’s capacity for bioscience research. The flagship program of the Alliance partnership is the MU/UCB Biosciences Training Program, an in-country, hands-on workshop model that trains a large number of students from Makerere University in infectious disease and molecular biology research. This approach nucleates training of larger and more diverse groups of students, development of mentoring and bi-directional research partnerships, and support of the local economy. Here, we describe the project, its conception, implementation, challenges, and outcomes of bioscience research workshops. We aim to provide a blueprint for workshop implementation, and create a valuable resource for bioscience research capacity strengthening in LMICs.