Designing the next generation of implementation research training for learners in low- and middle-income countries.

Efficacious health interventions tested through controlled trials often fail to show desired impacts when implemented at scale. These challenges can be particularly pervasive in low- and middle-income settings where health systems often lack the capacity and mechanisms required for high-quality research and evidence translation. Implementation research is a powerful tool for identifying and addressing the bottlenecks impeding the success of proven health interventions. Implementation research training initiatives, although growing in number, remain out of reach for many investigators in low- and middle-income settings, who possess the knowledge required to contextualize challenges and potential solutions in light of interacting community- and system-level features. We propose a realigned implementation research training model that centers on team-based learning, tailored didactic opportunities, learning-by-doing, and mentorship.

The Phylogeny of Rickettsia Using Different Evolutionary Signatures: How Tree-Like is Bacterial Evolution?

Rickettsia is a genus of intracellular bacteria whose hosts and transmission strategies are both impressively diverse, and this is reflected in a highly dynamic genome. Some previous studies have described the evolutionary history of Rickettsia as non-tree-like, due to incongruity between phylogenetic reconstructions using different portions of the genome. Here, we reconstruct the Rickettsia phylogeny using whole-genome data, including two new genomes from previously unsampled host groups. We find that a single topology, which is supported by multiple sources of phylogenetic signal, well describes the evolutionary history of the core genome. We do observe extensive incongruence between individual gene trees, but analyses of simulations over a single topology and interspersed partitions of sites show that this is more plausibly attributed to systematic error than to horizontal gene transfer. Some conflicting placements also result from phylogenetic analyses of accessory genome content (i.e., gene presence/absence), but we argue that these are also due to systematic error, stemming from convergent genome reduction, which cannot be accommodated by existing phylogenetic methods. Our results show that, even within a single genus, tests for gene exchange based on phylogenetic incongruence may be susceptible to false positives.

Implementing "from here to there": A case study of conceptual and practical challenges in implementation science.

There is a significant challenge in global health and development research that pivots on the difficulties of delivering (cost-)effective treatments or interventions that are scalable andtransferable across settings. That is, how does one deliver "true effects", proven treatments, into new settings? This is often addressed in pragmatic trials or implementation research in which one makes adjustments to the delivery of the treatment to ensure that it works here and there. In this critical analytical review, we argue that the approach mis-characterises the cause-effect relationship and fails to recognise the local, highly contextual nature of what it means to say an intervention "works". We use an ongoing randomised controlled trial (RCT)-an informal settlement redevelopment intervention in Indonesia and Fiji to reduce human exposure to pathogenic faecal contamination-as a vehicle for exploring the ideas and implications of identifying interventions that work in global health and development. We describe the highly contextualised features of the research and the challenges these would pose in attempts to generalise the results. In other words, we detail that which is frequently elided from most RCTs. As our critical lens, we us the work of American philosopher, Nancy Cartwright, who argued that research produces dappled regions of causal insights-lacunae against a backdrop of causal ignorance. Rather than learn about a relationship between a treatment and an outcome, we learn that in the right sort of context, a treatment reliably produces a particular outcome. Moving a treatment from here to there becomes, therefore, something of an engineering exercise to ensure the right factors (or "shields") are in place so the cause-effect is manifest. As a consequence, one cannot assume that comparative effectiveness or cost-effectiveness would be maintained.

Researching social innovation: is the tail wagging the dog?

BACKGROUND: Social Innovation in health initiatives have the potential to address unmet community health needs. For sustainable change to occur, we need to understand how and why a given intervention is effective. Bringing together communities, innovators, researchers, and policy makers is a powerful way to address this knowledge gap but differing priorities and epistemological backgrounds can make collaboration challenging. MAIN TEXT: To overcome these barriers, stakeholders will need to design policies and work in ways that provide an enabling environment for innovative products and services. Inherently about people, the incorporation of community engagement approaches is necessary for both the development of social innovations and accompanying research methodologies. Whilst the 'appropriate' level of participation is linked to intended outcomes, researchers have a role to play in better understanding how to harness the power of community engagement and to ensure that community perspectives form part of the evidence base that informs policy and practice. CONCLUSIONS: To effectively operate at the intersection between policy, social innovation, and research, all collaborators need to enter the process with the mindset of learners, rather than experts. Methods - quantitative and qualitative - must be selected according to research questions. The fields of implementation research, community-based participatory research, and realist research, amongst others, have much to offer. So do other sectors, notably education and business. In all this, researchers must assume the mantel of responsibility for research and not transfer the onus to communities under the guise of participation. By leveraging the expertise and knowledge of different ecosystem actors, we can design responsive health systems that integrate innovative approaches in ways that are greater than the sum of their parts.