Dataset Information

Evaluating a research training programme for frontline health workers in conflict-affected and fragile settings in the middle east.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Health Research Capacity Building (HRCB) is key to improving research production among health workers in LMICs to inform related policies and reduce health disparities in conflict settings. However, few HRCB programmes are available in the MENA region, and few evaluations of HRCB globally are reported in the literature.

Methods

Through a qualitative longitudinal design, we evaluated the first implementation of the Center for Research and Education in the Ecology of War (CREEW) fellowship. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with fellows (n = 5) throughout the programme at key phases during their completion of courses and at each research phase. Additional data was collected from supervisors and peers of fellows at their organizations. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis and presented under pre-identified themes.

Results

Despite the success of most fellows in learning on how to conduct research on AMR in conflict settings and completing the fellowship by producing research outputs, important challenges were identified. Results are categorized under predefined categories of (1) course delivery, (2) proposal development, (3) IRB application, (4) data collection, (5) data analysis, (6) manuscript write-up, (7) long-term effects, and (8) mentorship and networking.

Conclusion

The CREEW model, based on this evaluation, shows potential to be replicable and scalable to other contexts and other health-related topics. Detailed discussion and analysis are presented in the manuscript and synthesized recommendations are highlighted for future programmes to consider during the design, implementation, and evaluation of such programmes.

SUBMITTER: Naal H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10099017 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating a research training programme for frontline health workers in conflict-affected and fragile settings in the middle east.

Naal Hady H Daou Tracy T Brome Dayana D Mansour Rania R Sittah Ghassan Abu GA Giannou Christos C Steiger Enrique E Saleh Shadi S

BMC medical education 20230413 1

<h4>Background</h4>Health Research Capacity Building (HRCB) is key to improving research production among health workers in LMICs to inform related policies and reduce health disparities in conflict settings. However, few HRCB programmes are available in the MENA region, and few evaluations of HRCB globally are reported in the literature.<h4>Methods</h4>Through a qualitative longitudinal design, we evaluated the first implementation of the Center for Research and Education in the Ecology of War ...[more]

PMID: 37055781

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCancer represents a disproportionate burden in LMICs, especially conflict-affected countries in the MENA region. Research output on cancer fails to match the growing burden in the region. This bibliometric study aims to examine the status and trends of cancer research in fragile and conflict-affected settings in the MENA region from 2000 to 2021, while also incorporating economic and demographic indicators as additional factors of analysis.MethodsThe Web of Science databases were searched for publications related to cancer research in Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Palestine, Syria, and Yemen from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2021. The retrieved publications were screened based on preset eligibility criteria and the final list was analyzed using the Bibliometrix Package in R to generate the annual scientific production and citations, journals, institutions, authors, collaborations, keywords, and title co-occurrence. Each country's annual scientific production was analyzed against its annual GDP per capita.ResultsA total of 4,280 documents met the inclusion criteria in this research. The annual number of publications revealed a significant increase over the past 20 years. These publications were mostly published in international journals that had impact factors rated in the 3rd or 4th quartiles. The overall contribution of researchers from Fragile and Conflict-Affected Settings (FCS) to cancer research was 6.5% of the MENA cancer research productivity, despite comprising around 23% of the total MENA region's population. Lebanon had the highest publication productivity at the country level, followed by Iraq and Syria. GDP per capita was not significantly correlated with cancer research across the countries under investigation. At the institutional level, the American University of Beirut was the most prolific institution and had the highest number of collaborations and the widest range of cooperative partners. Most first authors were male researchers. There is an interest in cancer expression, prevalence, diagnosis, and management in terms of commonly researched topics.ConclusionThis study underscores the need for a concerted effort to improve cancer research outcomes in FCS, which can be achieved through targeted research, increased investment in research infrastructure and capacity-building initiatives, and greater regional and global collaboration.

Project description:BackgroundIn spite of the evident general negative effects of armed conflict on countries' health systems and populations' health outcomes, little is known about similar impacts of conflicts on the spread of antimicrobial resistances (AMR). This review was to address this evidence gap and describe: 1. Patterns of AMR in the Middle East (ME) and resistance profiles of pathogens included in the Global AMR Surveillance System (GLASS) supported by the World Health Organization; 2. Differences in proportions of AMR isolates between conflict and non-conflict countries.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines and searching five electronic databases. Subject heading and free text were searched for "antimicrobial resistances" and "Middle East", to identify observational studies on AMR published from January 2011 to June 2018. Data were extracted from included articles on a predefined set of variables. Percentages of AMR were analysed as median and interquartile ranges. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.ResultsA total of 132 articles met the inclusion criteria. Included studies showed heterogeneity in study design, laboratory methods and standards for interpretation of results, and an overall high risk of bias. Main findings were the following: 1. High proportions of carbapenem resistance in Acinetobacter spp. (median 74.2%), and both carbapenem resistance (median 8.1 and 15.4% for E. coli and K. pneumoniae respectively) and ESBL-production (median 32.3 and 27.9% for E. coli and K. pneumoniae respectively) amongst Enterobacteriaceae. S. aureus isolates showed a median methicillin resistance percentage of 45.1%, while vancomycin resistance was almost absent. A median of 50% of the strains of S. pneumoniae showed non-susceptibility to penicillin. 2. Similar trends were observed in conflict and non-conflict affected countries.ConclusionsThere is a lack of standardization in the methodological approach to AMR research in the Middle East. The proportion of antibiotic resistances among specific GLASS pathogens is high, particularly among Acinetobacter spp.

Project description:BackgroundHealth systems resilience (HSR) research is a rapidly expanding field, in which key concepts are discussed and theoretical frameworks are emerging with vibrant debate. Fragile and conflict-affected settings (FCAS) are contexts exposed to compounding stressors, for which resilience is an important characteristic. However, only limited evidence has been generated in such settings. We conducted a scoping review to: (a) identify the conceptual frameworks of HSR used in the analysis of shocks and stressors in FCAS; (b) describe the representation of different actors involved in health care governance and service provision in these settings; and (c) identify health systems operations as they relate to absorption, adaptation, and transformation in FCAS.MethodsWe used standard, extensive search methods. The search captured studies published between 2006 and January 2022. We included all peer reviewed and grey literature that adopted a HSR lens in the analysis of health responses to crises. Thematic analysis using both inductive and deductive approaches was conducted, adopting frameworks related to resilience characteristics identified by Kruk et al., and the resilience capacities described by Blanchet et al. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies met our inclusion criteria. The governance-centred, capacity-oriented framework for HSR emerged as the most frequently used lens of analysis to describe the health responses to conflict and chronic violence specifically. Most studies focused on public health systems' resilience analysis, while the private health sector is only examined in complementarity with the former. Communities are minimally represented, despite their widely acknowledged role in supporting HSR. The documentation of operations enacting HSR in FCAS is focused on absorption and adaptation, while transformation is seldom described. Absorptive, adaptive, and transformative interventions are described across seven different domains: safety and security, society, health system governance, stocks and supplies, built environment, health care workforce, and health care services.ConclusionsOur review findings suggest that the governance-centred framework can be useful to better understand HSR in FCAS. Future HSR research should document adaptive and transformative strategies that advance HSR, particularly in relation to actions intended to promote the safety and security of health systems, the built environment for health, and the adoption of a social justice lens.

Project description:BackgroundFragile and conflict-affected settings (FCAS) have a strong need to improve the capacity of local health workers to conduct health research in order to improve health policy and health outcomes. Health research capacity building (HRCB) programmes are ideal to equip health workers with the needed skills and knowledge to design and lead health-related research initiatives. The study aimed to review the characteristics of HRCB studies in FCASs in order to identify their strengths and weaknesses, and to recommend future directions for the field.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review and searched four databases for peer-reviewed articles that reported an HRCB initiative targeting health workers in a FCAS and published after 2010. Commentaries and editorials, cross-sectional studies, presentations, and interventions that did not have a capacity building component were excluded. Data on bibliographies of the studies and HRCB interventions and their outcomes were extracted. A descriptive approach was used to report the data, and a thematic approach was used to analyse the qualitative data.ResultsOut of 8822 articles, a total of 20 were included based on the eligibility criteria. Most of the initiatives centred around topics of health research methodology (70%), targeted an individual-level capacity building angle (95%), and were delivered in university or hospital settings (75%). Ten themes were identified and grouped into three categories. Significant challenges revolved around the lack of local research culture, shortages in logistic capability, interpersonal difficulties, and limited assessment and evaluation of HRCB programmes. Strengths of HRCB interventions included being locally driven, incorporating interactive pedagogies, and promoting multidisciplinary and holistic training. Common recommendations covered by the studies included opportunities to improve the content, logistics, and overarching structural components of HRCB initiatives.ConclusionOur findings have important implications on health research policy and related capacity building efforts. Importantly, FCASs should prioritize (1) funding HRCB efforts, (2) strengthening equitable international, regional, and national partnerships, (3) delivering locally led HRCB programmes, (4) ensuring long-term evaluations and implementing programmes at multiple levels of the healthcare system, and (5) adopting engaging and interactive approaches.

Project description:Children and young people are disproportionately vulnerable to harm during crises, yet child public health expertise is limited in humanitarian settings and outcomes and impact data are lacking. This review characterises child public health indicators that are routinely collected, required by donors, and recommended for use in fragile, conflict-affected, and vulnerable (FCV) settings. We conducted database and grey literature searches and collected indicators from technical agencies, partnerships, donors, and nongovernmental organisations providing child public health services in FCV settings. Indicators were included if they were child-specific or disaggregated for ≤18 years. Indicators were coded into domains of health status, health service, social determinants, and health behaviours and analysed for trends in thematic focus and clarity. A total of 668 indicators were included. Routinely collected indicators (N = 152) focused on health status and health services. Donors required only 14 indicators. Technical bodies and academics recommended 502 indicators for routine measurement. Prioritised topics included nutrition, paediatrics, infectious diseases, mortality, and maternal-newborn care. There were notable gaps in indicators for child development and disability. Child protection indicators were not routinely collected, despite being the focus of 39% of recommended indicators. There were overlaps and duplications, varied age disaggregations, and 49% of indicators required interpretation to measure. The review demonstrates that it is feasible to routinely measure child public health outcomes in FCV settings. Recommendations from technical agencies and partnerships are characterised by numerous indicators with duplication, poor definitions, and siloed sector-specific focus. There are gaps in measurement of critical child public health topics. To improve safety and effectiveness of interventions for child public health, consensus is needed on priority topics and a shortlist of quality, standardised indicators that governmental and nongovernmental actors can be reasonably expected to measure. Indicators should be prioritised to support decision-making and include proxy indicators for periods when routine measurement is hampered.

Project description:BackgroundIt is uncertain what could be the best training methods for infection prevention and control when an infectious disease threat is active or imminent in especially vulnerable or resource-scarce settings.MethodsA scoping review was undertaken to find and summarise relevant information about training modalities, replicability and effectiveness of IPC training programmes for clinical staff as reported in multiple study designs. Eligible settings were conflict-affected or in countries classified as low-income or lower-middle income (World Bank 2022 classifications). Search terms for LILACS and Scopus were developed with input of an expert working group. Initially found articles were dual-screened independently, data were extracted especially about infection threat, training outcomes, needs assessment and teaching modalities. Backwards and forwards citation searches were done to find additional studies. Narrative summary describes outcomes and aspects of the training programmes. A customised quality assessment tool was developed to describe whether each study could be informative for developing specific future training programmes in relevant vulnerable settings, based on six questions about replicability and eight questions about other biases.FindingsIncluded studies numbered 29, almost all (n = 27) were pre-post design, two were trials. Information within the included studies to enable replicability was low (average score 3.7/6). Nearly all studies reported significant improvement in outcomes suggesting that the predominant study design (pre-post) is inadequate to assess improvement with low bias, that any and all such training is beneficial, or that publication bias prevented reporting of less successful interventions and thus a informative overview.ConclusionIt seems likely that many possible training formats and methods can lead to improved worker knowledge, skills and / or practice in infection prevention and control. Definitive evidence in favour of any specific training format or method is hard to demonstrate due to incomplete descriptions, lack of documentation about unsuccessful training, and few least-biased study designs (experimental trials). Our results suggest that there is a significant opportunity to design experiments that could give insights in favour of or against specific training methods. "Sleeping" protocols for randomised controlled trials could be developed and then applied quickly when relevant future events arise, with evaluation for outcomes such as knowledge, practices, skills, confidence, and awareness.

Project description:BackgroundThe number of people living in fragile, conflict-affected, and vulnerable (FCV) settings is growing rapidly and attention to achieving universal health coverage must be accompanied by sufficient focus on the safety of care for universal access to be meaningful. Healthcare workers in these settings are working under extreme conditions, often with insufficient contextualized evidence to support decision-making. Recognising the relative paucity of, and methodological issues in gathering evidence from these settings, the evidence scanning described in this paper considered which patient safety interventions might offer the 'better bet', eg, the most effective and appropriate intervention in FCV settings.MethodsAn evidence scanning approach was used to examine the literature. The search was limited to FCV settings and low-income settings as defined by the World Bank, but if a systematic review included a mix of evidence from FCV/low income settings, as well as low-middle income settings, it was included. The search was conducted in English and limited to studies published from 2003 onwards, utilising Google Scholar as a publicly accessible database and further review of the grey literature, with specific attention to the outputs of non-governmental organisations. The search and subsequent analysis were completed between April and June 2020.ResultsThe majority of studies identified related to strengthening infection prevention and control which was also found to be the 'better bet' intervention that could generalise to other settings, be most feasible to implement, and most effective for improving patient care and associated outcomes. Other prioritized interventions include risk management, with contributing elements such as reporting, audits, and death review processes.ConclusionsInfection prevention and control interventions dominate in the literature for multiple reasons including strength of evidence, acceptability, feasibility, and impact on patient and health worker well-being. However, there is an urgent need to further develop the evidence base, specialist knowledge, and field guidance on a range of other patient safety interventions such as education and training, patient identification, subject specific safety actions, and risk management.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Health care workers (HCWs) are essential for the delivery of health care services in conflict areas and in rebuilding health systems post-conflict. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to systematically identify and map the published evidence on HCWs in conflict and post-conflict settings. Our ultimate aim is to inform researchers and funders on research gap on this subject and support relevant stakeholders by providing them with a comprehensive resource of evidence about HCWs in conflict and post-conflict settings on a global scale. METHODS:We conducted a systematic mapping of the literature. We included a wide range of study designs, addressing any type of personnel providing health services in either conflict or post-conflict settings. We conducted a descriptive analysis of the general characteristics of the included papers and built two interactive systematic maps organized by country, study design and theme. RESULTS:Out of 13,863 identified citations, we included a total of 474 studies: 304 on conflict settings, 149 on post-conflict settings, and 21 on both conflict and post-conflict settings. For conflict settings, the most studied counties were Iraq (15%), Syria (15%), Israel (10%), and the State of Palestine (9%). The most common types of publication were opinion pieces in conflict settings (39%), and primary studies (33%) in post-conflict settings. In addition, most of the first and corresponding authors were affiliated with countries different from the country focus of the paper. Violence against health workers was the most tackled theme of papers reporting on conflict settings, while workforce performance was the most addressed theme by papers reporting on post-conflict settings. The majority of papers in both conflict and post-conflict settings did not report funding sources (81% and 53%) or conflicts of interest of authors (73% and 62%), and around half of primary studies did not report on ethical approvals (45% and 41%). CONCLUSIONS:This systematic mapping provides a comprehensive database of evidence about HCWs in conflict and post-conflict settings on a global scale that is often needed to inform policies and strategies on effective workforce planning and management and in reducing emigration. It can also be used to identify evidence for policy-relevant questions, knowledge gaps to direct future primary research, and knowledge clusters.

Dataset Information

Evaluating a research training programme for frontline health workers in conflict-affected and fragile settings in the middle east.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Evaluating a research training programme for frontline health workers in conflict-affected and fragile settings in the middle east.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets