• Login
    View Item 
    •   Mak IR Home
    • College of Health Sciences (CHS)
    • School of Medicine (Sch. of Med.)
    • School of Medicine (Sch. of Med.) Collections
    • View Item
    •   Mak IR Home
    • College of Health Sciences (CHS)
    • School of Medicine (Sch. of Med.)
    • School of Medicine (Sch. of Med.) Collections
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Where is students’ research in evidenceinformed decision-making in health? Assessing productivity and use of postgraduate students’ research in lowand middle-income countries: a systematic review

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Obuku-chs-res.pdf (628.2Kb)
    Date
    2017
    Author
    Obuku, E.A.
    Lavis, J.N.
    Kinengyere, A.
    Mafigiri, D.K.
    Sengooba, F.
    Karamagi, C.
    Sewankambo, N.K.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Background: Investing in research that is not accessible or used is a waste of resources and an injustice to human subject participants. Post-graduate students’ research in institutions of higher learning involves considerable time, effort and money, warranting evaluation of the return on investment. Although individual studies addressing research productivity of post-graduate students are available, a synthesis of these results in low-income settings has not been undertaken. Our first aim is to identify the types of approaches that increase productivity and those that increase the application of medical post-graduate students’ research and to assess their effectiveness. Our second aim is to assess the determinants of post-graduate students’ research productivity. Methods: We propose a two-stage systematic review. We will electronically search for published and grey literature in PubMed/MEDLINE and the ERIC databases, as well as contact authors, research administration units of universities, and other key informants as appropriate. In stage one, we will map the nature of the evidence available using a knowledge translation framework adapted from existing literature. We will perform duplicate screening and selection of articles, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessments for included primary studies as described in the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews. Our primary outcome is publication output as a measure of research productivity, whilst we defined research use as citations in peer-reviewed journals or policy-related documents as our secondary outcome. In stage two, we will perform a structured narrative synthesis of the findings and advance to quantitative meta-analysis if the number of studies are adequate and their heterogeneity is low. Adapting the Grading, Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, we will assess the overall quality of evidence for effects, and report our results in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Discussion: We will share our findings with universities, other training institutions, civil society, funders as well as government departments in charge of education and health particularly in low- and middle-income countries.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10570/7877
    Collections
    • School of Medicine (Sch. of Med.) Collections

    DSpace 5.8 copyright © Makerere University 
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV
     

     

    Browse

    All of Mak IRCommunities & CollectionsTitlesAuthorsBy AdvisorBy Issue DateSubjectsBy TypeThis CollectionTitlesAuthorsBy AdvisorBy Issue DateSubjectsBy Type

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    DSpace 5.8 copyright © Makerere University 
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Theme by 
    Atmire NV