1
|
Li G, Jin Y, Mbuagbaw L, Dolovich L, Adachi JD, Levine MAH, Cook D, Samaan Z, Thabane L. Enhancing research publications and advancing scientific writing in health research collaborations: sharing lessons learnt from the trenches. J Multidiscip Healthc 2018; 11:245-254. [PMID: 29844676 PMCID: PMC5961639 DOI: 10.2147/jmdh.s152681] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Disseminating research protocols, processes, methods or findings via peer-reviewed publications has substantive merits and benefits to various stakeholders. PURPOSE In this article, we share strategies to enhance research publication contents (ie, what to write about) and to facilitate scientific writing (ie, how to write) in health research collaborations. METHODS Empirical experience sharing. RESULTS To enhance research publication contents, we encourage identifying appropriate opportunities for publications, publishing protocols ahead of results papers, seeking publications related to methodological issues, considering justified secondary analyses, and sharing academic process or experience. To advance writing, we suggest setting up scientific writing as a goal, seeking an appropriate mentorship, making full use of scientific meetings and presentations, taking some necessary formal training in areas such as effective communication and time and stress management, and embracing the iterative process of writing. CONCLUSION All the strategies we share are dependent upon each other; and they advocate gradual academic accomplishments through study and training in a "success-breeds-success" way. It is expected that the foregoing shared strategies in this paper, together with other previous guidance articles, can assist one with enhancing research publications, and eventually one's academic success in health research collaborations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guowei Li
- Department of Health Research Methods, Impact and Evidence, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Centre for Evaluation of Medicines, Programs for Assessment of Technology in Health (PATH) Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Yanling Jin
- Department of Health Research Methods, Impact and Evidence, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Lawrence Mbuagbaw
- Department of Health Research Methods, Impact and Evidence, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Lisa Dolovich
- Department of Health Research Methods, Impact and Evidence, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Jonathan D Adachi
- St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Mitchell AH Levine
- Department of Health Research Methods, Impact and Evidence, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Centre for Evaluation of Medicines, Programs for Assessment of Technology in Health (PATH) Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Deborah Cook
- Department of Health Research Methods, Impact and Evidence, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Zainab Samaan
- Department of Health Research Methods, Impact and Evidence, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Lehana Thabane
- Department of Health Research Methods, Impact and Evidence, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Morfaw F, Mbuagbaw L, Thabane L, Rodrigues C, Wunderlich AP, Nana P, Kunda J. Male involvement in prevention programs of mother to child transmission of HIV: a systematic review to identify barriers and facilitators. Syst Rev 2013; 2:5. [PMID: 23320454 PMCID: PMC3599633 DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-2-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 126] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2012] [Accepted: 11/26/2012] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many reports point to the beneficial effect of male partner involvement in programs for the prevention of mother-to-child-transmission (PMTCT) of HIV in curbing pediatric HIV infections. This paper summarizes the barriers and facilitators of male involvement in prevention programs of mother-to-child-transmission of HIV. METHODS We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for studies published in English from 1998 to March 2012. We included studies conducted in a context of antenatal care or PMTCT of HIV reporting male actions that affected female uptake of PMTCT services. We did not target any specific interventions for this review. RESULTS We identified 24 studies from peer-reviewed journals; 21 from sub-Saharan Africa, 2 from Asia and 1 from Europe. Barriers to male PMTCT involvement were mainly at the level of the society, the health system and the individual. The most pertinent was the societal perception of antenatal care and PMTCT as a woman's activity, and it was unacceptable for men to be involved. Health system factors such as long waiting times at the antenatal care clinic and the male unfriendliness of PMTCT services were also identified. The lack of communication within the couple, the reluctance of men to learn their HIV status, the misconception by men that their spouse's HIV status was a proxy of theirs, and the unwillingness of women to get their partners involved due to fear of domestic violence, stigmatization or divorce were among the individual factors. Actions shown to facilitate male PMTCT involvement were either health system actions or factors directly tied to the individuals. Inviting men to the hospital for voluntary counseling and HIV testing and offering of PMTCT services to men at sites other than antenatal care were key health system facilitators. Prior knowledge of HIV and prior male HIV testing facilitated their involvement. Financial dependence of women was key to facilitating spousal involvement. CONCLUSIONS There is need for health system amendments and context-specific adaptations of public policy on PMTCT services to break down the barriers to and facilitate male PMTCT involvement. TRIAL REGISTRATION The protocol for this review was registered with the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) record CRD42011001703.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frederick Morfaw
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicines and Biomedical Sciences, University of Yaounde 1, PO Box 1364, Yaounde, Cameroon.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|