全球卫生合作研究:从强制合作到强制署名。

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Global Health Research and Policy Pub Date : 2023-11-22 DOI:10.1186/s41256-023-00334-x
Wongani John Nyangulu
{"title":"全球卫生合作研究:从强制合作到强制署名。","authors":"Wongani John Nyangulu","doi":"10.1186/s41256-023-00334-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Collaborative research between the global north and global south is common and growing in number. Due to inability of local governments to fund research, global north actors provide the bulk of research funding. While providing mutual benefits, global collaborative research projects are far from ideal. In this paper, we review the authorship discrepancies in global collaborative research, discuss preventive measures in place and their shortfalls, and recommend an intervention to address the problem. Malawi research guidelines recommend collaboration between foreign and local researchers in locally conducted research. However, there is no provision requiring joint authorship in final published papers. Journal recommendations on authorship criteria exist, but they can disadvantage low- and middle-income country researchers in collaborative projects because of exclusionary interpretations of guidelines. For example, the requirement for authors to make substantial contributions to conception or design of the work may favor research grant holders, often from the global north. Systematic and holistic changes proposed to address power asymmetries at the core of the problem have been proposed. However, these proposals may take a long time to produce change. Ad interim, local institutions can take more direct action to address inequalities by establishing offices of research integrity to enforce mandates to increase opportunities for authorship in collaborative research.</p>","PeriodicalId":52405,"journal":{"name":"Global Health Research and Policy","volume":"8 1","pages":"48"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10664688/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Global health collaborative research: beyond mandatory collaboration to mandatory authorship.\",\"authors\":\"Wongani John Nyangulu\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41256-023-00334-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Collaborative research between the global north and global south is common and growing in number. Due to inability of local governments to fund research, global north actors provide the bulk of research funding. While providing mutual benefits, global collaborative research projects are far from ideal. In this paper, we review the authorship discrepancies in global collaborative research, discuss preventive measures in place and their shortfalls, and recommend an intervention to address the problem. Malawi research guidelines recommend collaboration between foreign and local researchers in locally conducted research. However, there is no provision requiring joint authorship in final published papers. Journal recommendations on authorship criteria exist, but they can disadvantage low- and middle-income country researchers in collaborative projects because of exclusionary interpretations of guidelines. For example, the requirement for authors to make substantial contributions to conception or design of the work may favor research grant holders, often from the global north. Systematic and holistic changes proposed to address power asymmetries at the core of the problem have been proposed. However, these proposals may take a long time to produce change. Ad interim, local institutions can take more direct action to address inequalities by establishing offices of research integrity to enforce mandates to increase opportunities for authorship in collaborative research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":52405,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Health Research and Policy\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"48\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10664688/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Health Research and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41256-023-00334-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Health Research and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41256-023-00334-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

全球北方和全球南方之间的合作研究是普遍的,而且越来越多。由于地方政府无力资助研究,全球北方参与者提供了大部分研究资金。在提供互惠互利的同时,全球合作研究项目远非理想。在本文中,我们回顾了全球合作研究中的作者差异,讨论了现有的预防措施及其不足之处,并提出了解决问题的干预措施。马拉维研究指南建议外国和当地研究人员在当地进行的研究中进行合作。然而,在最终发表的论文中没有要求共同作者的规定。关于作者标准的期刊建议是存在的,但是由于对指南的排斥性解释,它们可能使中低收入国家的研究人员在合作项目中处于不利地位。例如,要求作者对工作的概念或设计做出重大贡献可能有利于研究资助的持有者,这些人通常来自北半球。已经提出了系统和整体的变革,以解决问题的核心——权力不对称。然而,这些建议可能需要很长时间才能产生变化。在此期间,地方机构可以采取更直接的行动,通过建立研究诚信办公室来解决不平等问题,以执行授权,增加合作研究中作者的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Global health collaborative research: beyond mandatory collaboration to mandatory authorship.

Collaborative research between the global north and global south is common and growing in number. Due to inability of local governments to fund research, global north actors provide the bulk of research funding. While providing mutual benefits, global collaborative research projects are far from ideal. In this paper, we review the authorship discrepancies in global collaborative research, discuss preventive measures in place and their shortfalls, and recommend an intervention to address the problem. Malawi research guidelines recommend collaboration between foreign and local researchers in locally conducted research. However, there is no provision requiring joint authorship in final published papers. Journal recommendations on authorship criteria exist, but they can disadvantage low- and middle-income country researchers in collaborative projects because of exclusionary interpretations of guidelines. For example, the requirement for authors to make substantial contributions to conception or design of the work may favor research grant holders, often from the global north. Systematic and holistic changes proposed to address power asymmetries at the core of the problem have been proposed. However, these proposals may take a long time to produce change. Ad interim, local institutions can take more direct action to address inequalities by establishing offices of research integrity to enforce mandates to increase opportunities for authorship in collaborative research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Health Research and Policy
Global Health Research and Policy Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
1.10%
发文量
43
审稿时长
5 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Health Research and Policy, an open-access, multidisciplinary journal, publishes research on various aspects of global health, addressing topics like health equity, health systems and policy, social determinants of health, disease burden, population health, and other urgent global health issues. It serves as a forum for high-quality research focused on regional and global health improvement, emphasizing solutions for health equity.
期刊最新文献
How the U.S. presidential election impacts global health: governance, funding, and beyond. Barriers and facilitators to healthcare facility utilization by non-Ebola patients during the 2018-2020 Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Impact of access to coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention on in-hospital and five-year mortality in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a propensity-matched cohort study in Thailand. Prevalence of potential drug‒drug interactions and associated factors among elderly patients in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. El Niño southern oscillation, weather patterns, and bacillary dysentery in the Yangtze River Basin, China.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1