Factors associated with research productivity in higher education institutions in Africa: a systematic review

Influence of Mentorship and the Working Environment on English as a Foreign Language Teachers’ Research Productivity: The Mediation Role of Research Motivation and Self-Efficacy

Research productivity is an important criterion for the university to assess teachers. Studies about factors that affect teachers’ research productivity are increasing nowadays. It is generally agreed that academics’ research productivity depends on how much mentorship is provided to them and how the current working environment is mediated by their research motivation and self-efficacy. Despite the increasing amount of the literature along this line, we know little about what kinds of situations that Chinese university English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers are in and how they regard the importance of mentorship and what roles their working environments would play in affecting their research productivity. To fill the research gap, we utilized the snowball method to collect the survey data from 546 Chinese EFL tertiary teachers. The results show that mentorship is not correlated with research productivity while the working environment has a positive direct correlation with it. Both motivation and self-efficacy mediate the working environment and research productivity significantly. Specifically, only extrinsic motivation has a negative mediation influence on teachers’ research productivity; teachers’ intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy play a positive mediation role in affecting their research productivity.

Pharmacological management of seizures in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review

Background: Some patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been reported to exhibit neurological symptoms such as seizures and impaired consciousness. Our study reviews reported cases to assess the pharmacological approach to managing seizures in SARS-CoV-2 patients and associated outcomes. Methods: A systematic review of case reports on the incidence of seizures following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among patients that reported use of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in management was performed by using the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis) guidelines. Databases used included EMBASE, PubMed, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar. Data was presented as qualitative and descriptive data. Results: In total, 67 articles were selected for full-text assessment, of which 19 were included in the final review. Patients had a median age of 54 years, most of whom were male. Remdisivir, dexamethasone, Laminavir, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and Lopinavir-ritonavir were common agents used in the management of COVID-19. Most patients presented with either generalized tonic-clonic seizures or status epilepticus. Most patients received levetiracetam as drug choice or as part of their regimen. Other AEDs commonly prescribed included midazolam and sodium valproate. Some patients received no antiepileptic drug therapy. Most of the patients who died had more than one comorbidity. Also, most of the patients who died received COVID-19 treatment drugs. None of the patients who received midazolam as drug choice or as part of their regimen developed recurrent seizures in contrast to patients who received levetiracetam and sodium valproate as drug choice or as part of their regimen. Interestingly, none of the patients who received no AEDs suffered recurrent seizures or died. Conclusions: Standard guidelines for managing seizures in COVID-19 patients may be required. A limitation of this review is that it involved the use of case reports with no controls and a small number of patients.

Factors associated with research productivity in higher education institutions in Africa: a systematic review

Background: There are low levels of research productivity among Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in Africa, a situation that is likely to compromise the development agenda of the continent if not addressed. We conducted a systematic literature review to determine the factors associated with research productivity in HEIs in Africa and the researchers' motives for research. Methods: We identified 838 papers related to research productivity in HEIs in Africa from various databases, from which we included 28 publications for review. The inclusion criteria were that (i) the paper's primary focus was on factors associated with research productivity; (ii) the setting was on the higher education institutions in Africa; (iii) the type of publication was peer-reviewed papers and book chapters based on primary or secondary data analysis; and (iv) the language was English or French. Essays, opinions, blogs, editorials, reviews, and commentaries were excluded. Results: Most of the studies operationalized research productivity as either journal publications or conference proceedings. Both institutional and individual factors are associated with the level of research productivity in HEIs in Africa. Institutional factors include the availability of research funding, level of institutional networking, and the degree of research collaborations, while individual factors include personal motivation, academic qualifications, and research self-efficacy. Conclusions: Deliberate efforts in HEIs in Africa that addressed both individual and institutional barriers to research productivity are promising. This study recommends that the leadership of HEIs in Africa prioritizes the funding of research to enable researchers to contribute to the development agenda of the continent. Moreover, HEIs should build institutional support to research through the provision of research enabling environments, policies and incentives; strengthening of researchers' capabilities through relevant training courses, mentorship and coaching; and embracing networking and collaboration opportunities.