Towards inclusive priority-setting for global health research projects: recommendations for sharing power with communities

被引:24
作者
Pratt, Bridget [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Melbourne, Ctr Hlth Equ, Sch Populat & Global Hlth, 207 Bouverie St, Carlton, Vic 3010, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Engagement; power; inclusion; priority-setting; justice; health research; global health; PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH; ENGAGEMENT; PATIENT; KNOWLEDGE; FRAMEWORK; JUSTICE; EQUITY;
D O I
10.1093/heapol/czz041
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Global health research priority-setting is dominated by funders and researchers, often from high-income countries. Engaging communities that are considered disadvantaged and marginalized in priority-setting is essential to making their voices and concerns visible in global health research projects' topics and questions. However, without attention to power dynamics, their engagement can often lead to presence without voice and voice without influence. Global health research priority-setting must be designed to share power with such communities to ensure that research projects' topics and questions reflect the health care and system inequities they face. To better understand what sharing 'power over' priority-setting requires, 29 in-depth, semi-structured interviews and one focus group were undertaken with researchers, ethicists, community engagement practitioners and community-based organization staff. The study shows that, before moving ahead with priority-setting for global health research projects, it is vital to assess whether contextual factors necessary for meaningful engagement between researchers and marginalized communities are present or can be built in the research setting. Study findings describe several such contextual factors and 12 features of priority-setting that affect how processes are run, who participates in them, and who influences their outputs. During priority-setting for global health research projects, it is essential to implement ways of sharing power with communities in relation to these features. Study findings describe a multitude of such strategies that are employed in practice. After priority-setting, it is important to demonstrate respect and accountability to communities.
引用
收藏
页码:346 / 357
页数:12
相关论文
共 66 条
  • [1] Bringing 'the public' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: From principles to practice
    Abelson, Julia
    Giacomini, Mita
    Lehoux, Pascale
    Gauvin, Francois-Pieffe
    [J]. HEALTH POLICY, 2007, 82 (01) : 37 - 50
  • [2] Community Engagement in Research: Frameworks for Education and Peer Review
    Ahmed, Syed M.
    Palermo, Ann-Gel S.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2010, 100 (08) : 1380 - 1387
  • [3] Public Engagement in Health Priority Setting in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Current Trends and Considerations for Policy
    Alderman, Katarzyna Bolsewicz
    Hipgrave, David
    Jimenez-Soto, Eliana
    [J]. PLOS MEDICINE, 2013, 10 (08)
  • [4] [Anonymous], 1990, ASIA-PAC J PUBLIC HE, DOI DOI 10.1177/101053959000400420
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2007, EPISTEMIC INJUSTICE
  • [6] [Anonymous], 2004, MEX STAT HLTH RES
  • [7] LADDER OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
    ARNSTEIN, SR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNERS, 1969, 35 (04): : 216 - 224
  • [8] BARISIONE M, 2012, J PUBLIC DELIBERATIO, V8
  • [9] Responsibilities in international research: a new look revisited
    Benatar, Solomon R.
    Singer, Peter A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2010, 36 (04) : 194 - 197
  • [10] Benhabib Seyla., 1996, DEMOCRACY DIFFERENCE, P67