Engaging stakeholders to level up COPD care in LMICs: lessons learned from the "Breathe Well" programme in Brazil, China, Georgia, and North Macedonia.

BACKGROUND: Effective stakeholder engagement in health research is increasingly being recognised and promoted as an important pathway to closing the gap between knowledge production and its use in health systems. However, little is known about its process and impacts, particularly in low-and middle-income countries. This opinion piece draws on the stakeholder engagement experiences from a global health research programme on Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) led by clinician researchers in Brazil, China, Georgia and North Macedonia, and presents the process, outcomes and lessons learned. MAIN BODY: Each country team was supported with an overarching engagement protocol and mentored to develop a tailored plan. Patient involvement in research was previously limited in all countries, requiring intensive efforts through personal communication, meetings, advisory groups and social media. Accredited training programmes were effective incentives for participation from healthcare providers; and aligning research findings with competing policy priorities enabled interest and dialogue with decision-makers. The COVID-19 pandemic severely limited possibilities for planned engagement, although remote methods were used where possible. Planned and persistent engagement contributed to shared knowledge and commitment to change, including raised patient and public awareness about COPD, improved skills and practice of healthcare providers, increased interest and support from clinical leaders, and dialogue for integrating COPD services into national policy and practice. CONCLUSION: Stakeholder engagement enabled relevant local actors to produce and utilise knowledge for small wins such as improving day-to-day practice and for long-term goals of equitable access to COPD care. For it to be successful and sustained, stakeholder engagement needs to be valued and integrated throughout the research and knowledge generation process, complete with dedicated resources, contextualised and flexible planning, and commitment.

Evaluation capacity building in response to the agricultural research impact agenda: Emerging insights from Ireland, Catalonia (Spain), New Zealand, and Uruguay.

Performance-based funding and calls for public-funded science to demonstrate societal impact are encouraging public research organisations to evaluate impact, the so-called impact agenda. This paper explores evaluation methods of four fully or partially public-funded agricultural research organisations and how they are building evaluative capacity to respond to the impact agenda. Drawing on cross-organisational comparison of the readiness of each organisation to implement evaluation, the implications for improving evaluative capacity building (ECB) are discussed. This study extends the current literature on ECB, as very little has focussed on research organisations in general, and particularly agricultural research. Driven by the impact agenda, the organisations are beginning to emphasise summative evaluation. Organisational leaders valuing the demonstration of impact and commitment to building evaluation capacity are important precursors to other aspects of organisational readiness to implement evaluation. However, organisational emphasis remains on using evaluation for accountability and to improve efficiency and allocation of funding. The organisations have yet to systematically embed evaluation processes and capabilities for learning at programme and organisation-levels. There is, therefore, an opportunity to develop organisation and programme-level evaluation processes that inform each other and the pathways to impact from science. To realise this opportunity, organisations could strengthen internal and external networks of evaluation practitioners and academics to bridge the gap between the theory and practice of monitoring and evaluation for learning (MEL) and to begin to reshape organisational culture by using evaluation methods that are grounded in co-production and integrated scientific and societal values.

The geographic bias of mammal studies: a comparison of a half a century of research on Palearctic and Neotropical mammals / El sesgo geográfico en el estudio de los mamíferos: comparación de medio siglo de investigación sobre mamíferos paleárticos y neotropicales

Abstract Introduction: There are no studies that specifically compare research output of Palearctic and Neotropical mammalogy; such comparison would be useful for informed decisions in conservation and management. Objective: To compare the scientific documents and citations about Palearctic and Neotropical mammals over half a century. Methods: We compared 50 years (1970-2019) of documents on 60 medium and large-sized (heavier than 1 kg) mammal species, in Scopus and the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection, considering number of documents and four citation indicators at the species level (h-index, citation rate, total citations, and citations per year). Results: We retrieved 13 274 documents in Scopus and 12 913 in WoS. We found that Palearctic mammals have 3.77 times more documents than Neotropical species in Scopus (3.91 times in WoS), and that the documents recorded 5.95 more total citations in Scopus (6.93 times more in WoS). Palearctic documents also record more yearly citations and a higher h-index in both Scopus and WoS. Scopus retrieved more articles for Neotropical species (2 782 vs. 2 631 in WoS) and had more citations (28 120 vs. 24 977 in WoS); differences for the citation indicators between regions were marker in WoS. The h-index and total citations are greatly affected by how many studies are published, i.e. the region with more production is the one with higher values. The Neotropical articles showed a greater growth rate in the last decade, decreasing the gap between both regions. Conclusion: There is a regional bias in WoS and Scopus, which retrieve more articles and citations about Palearctic mammals than about Neotropical mammals; this bias is worse in WoS and means that an urgent increase in indexed research about Neotropical species is needed to be on par with Palearctic research.

Resumen Introducción: No existen estudios que comparen, específicamente, la investigación de la mastozoología paleártica con la neotropical; pero tales comparaciones serían útiles para tomar decisiones informadas en conservación y manejo. Objetivo: Comparar los documentos científicos sobre mamíferos paleárticos y neotropicales, y su impacto en citas, durante medio siglo. Métodos: Comparamos 50 años (1970-2019) de documentos sobre 60 especies de mamíferos de tamaño mediano y grande (más de 1 kg), en Scopus y la colección principal del Web of Science (WoS), considerando el número de documentos y cuatro indicadores de citas a nivel de especie (índice h, tasa de citas, total de citas y citas por año). Resultados: Recuperamos 13 274 documentos en Scopus y 12 913 en WoS, y encontramos que los mamíferos paleárticos tienen 3.77 veces más documentos que las especies neotropicales en Scopus (3.91 veces en WoS), y que los documentos registran 5.95 más citas totales en Scopus (6.93 veces más en WoS). Los documentos paleárticos también registran más citas anuales y un índice h más alto, tanto en Scopus como en WoS. Scopus recuperó más artículos para especies neotropicales (2 782 vs. 2 631 en WoS) y tuvo más citas (28 120 vs. 24 977 en WoS). Las diferencias para los indicadores de citas entre regiones fueron más marcadas en WoS. El índice h y el total de citas se ven muy afectados por la cantidad de estudios publicados, es decir, la región con más producción será la que tenga indicadores más altos. Los artículos neotropicales mostraron una mayor tasa de crecimiento en la última década, disminuyendo la brecha entre ambas regiones. Conclusión: Existe un sesgo regional en WoS y Scopus, que recuperan más artículos y citas sobre mamíferos paleárticos que sobre mamíferos neotropicales; este sesgo es peor en WoS y significa que se necesita un aumento urgente en la investigación indexada sobre especies neotropicales para estar al nivel de la investigación paleártica.

Conceptual model of comprehensive research metrics for improved human health and environment: [review] / Modelo conceitual de indicadores de desempenho abrangentes para a melhoria da saúde humana e do meio ambiente: [revisão]

Performance measurement predominantly consisted of near-term outputs measured through bibliometrics, but the recent focus is on accountability for investment based on long-term outcomes. Our objective is to build a logic model and associated metrics through which to measure the contribution of environmental health research programs to improvements in human health, the environment, and the economy. We developed a logic model that defines the components and linkages between extramural environmental health research grant programs and the outputs and outcomes related to health and social welfare, environmental quality and sustainability, economics, and quality of life, focusing on the environmental health research portfolio of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Division of Extramural Research and Training and delineates pathways for contributions by five types of institutional partners in the research process. The model is being applied to specific NIEHS research applications and the broader research community. We briefly discuss two examples and discuss the strengths and limits of outcome- based evaluation of research programs.

A avaliação de desempenho compreendia predominantemente resultados de curto prazo avaliados através de bibliometria, mas recentemente a ênfase voltou-se à prestação de contas dos investimentos com base em resultados a longo prazo. Nosso objetivo é criar um modelo lógico e métricas associadas através dos quais possamos avaliar a contribuição de programas de pesquisa em saúde ambiental para melhorar a saúde humana, o meio ambiente e a economia. Desenvolvemos um modelo lógico que define os componentes e elos entre os programas de pesquisa em saúde ambiental extramuros subsidiados e os resultados relacionados à saúde e ao bem-estar social, qualidade ambiental e sustentabilidade, economia e qualidade de vida, com ênfase no portfólio de pesquisa em saúde ambiental do National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), divisão de pesquisa e treinamento extramuros, delineando caminhos para as contribuições de cinco tipos de parceiros institucionais no processo de pesquisa. O modelo está sendo usado em aplicações específicas do NIEHS e na comunidade de pesquisa como um todo. Analisamos brevemente dois exemplos e os pontos fortes e limitações da avaliação baseada em resultados dos programas de pesquisa.