Mutua Meshack Nzesei, Harding Andrew, Mukumbang Ferdinand C, Pulford Justin
Centre for Capacity Research, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2025 Aug 20;20(8):e0330360. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0330360. eCollection 2025.
There is a growing call for theory-driven evaluation approaches to health research capacity strengthening (HRCS) interventions. Specifically, realist evaluation has gained wide attention given its response to the question: How does an intervention work, why, for whom and under what conditions? In realist evaluation, initial programme theories (IPTs) are first elicited before they are tested and refined. This article describes the IPTs of an HRCS programme aimed at strengthening the research capacity of African universities. Using the 'Developing Excellence in Leadership, Training and Science (DELTAS Africa) programme as a real-world case, the IPTs were drafted through a review of the programme documents and other published literature. Seven programme documents and 32 published papers covering 26 research capacity strengthening initiatives in African universities were reviewed. Different Context, Mechanism and Outcomes (CMO) were extracted and CMO configurations were formulated. Thereafter, the CMO configurations were refined through four interviews with the DELTAS programme designing team. Three transferrable IPTs were elicited. Evidence suggests that, for HRCS interventions to be more effective in strengthening research capacity in African universities, systemic challenges (e.g., lack of funding for health research, ineffective research policy environment and lack of institutional support for research) need to be addressed and the university staff/ researchers empowered, incentivised and motivated. The article underscores the importance of institutional buy-in, effective implementation of research policies (e.g., protected time, research career pathways, gender equality, research ethics and integrity, anti-bullying and anti-harassment, etc.), long-term research funding and equitable research partnerships in fostering a strong research environment and culture. Notably, the article makes a methodological contribution by demonstrating how IPTs can be developed using disparate evidence sources. The IPTs will be tested and refined through a primary realist evaluation, which will further refine the CMOs presented in this article and provide insights into the current HRCS evaluation framework.
对于以理论为驱动的健康研究能力加强(HRCS)干预评估方法的呼声日益高涨。具体而言,现实主义评估因其对以下问题的回应而备受广泛关注:一项干预措施如何发挥作用、为何起作用、对谁起作用以及在何种条件下起作用?在现实主义评估中,初始项目理论(IPT)首先被引出,然后进行测试和完善。本文描述了一个旨在加强非洲大学研究能力的HRCS项目的IPT。以“非洲卓越领导力、培训与科学发展(DELTAS Africa)项目”作为实际案例,通过对项目文件和其他已发表文献的审查起草了IPT。审查了七份项目文件和32篇发表的论文,这些文件和论文涵盖了非洲大学的26项研究能力加强举措。提取了不同的背景、机制和结果(CMO),并制定了CMO配置。此后,通过与DELTAS项目设计团队进行的四次访谈对CMO配置进行了完善。引出了三个可转移的IPT。有证据表明,为使HRCS干预措施在加强非洲大学研究能力方面更有效,需要应对系统性挑战(例如,健康研究缺乏资金、无效的研究政策环境以及对研究缺乏机构支持),并赋予大学工作人员/研究人员权力、给予激励并激发其积极性。本文强调了机构认同、有效实施研究政策(例如,受保护的时间、研究职业发展路径、性别平等、研究伦理与诚信、反欺凌和反骚扰等)、长期研究资金以及公平的研究伙伴关系在营造强大的研究环境和文化方面的重要性。值得注意的是,本文通过展示如何利用不同的证据来源来制定IPT做出了方法学贡献。这些IPT将通过一次初步的现实主义评估进行测试和完善,这将进一步完善本文中呈现的CMO,并为当前的HRCS评估框架提供见解。