Abstract
Introduction The ability to conduct cross-disciplinary research in international collaborations is critical for improving global health. Published evidence on actions to foster cross-disciplinary research comes mainly from high-income countries with its applicability to global health unclear. Our study investigated the actions taken to foster cross-disciplinary research across a North-South global health programme to recommend actions to improve the effectiveness of future cross-disciplinary research programmes in global health.
Methods We used an adapted three-component framework to frame data collection and analyses. Building on a recent literature review, we compared actions used by the programme for planning, implementing and managing cross-disciplinary research to those described in the literature. Data sources included interviews with 31 participants (including researchers, administrators, and collaborators), a review of programme documents, a baseline survey, and observations of interactions at meetings and events. Interview data were coded and analysed using the framework. Narrative summaries were created using thematic synthesis and triangulated by the document review and observations.
Results For cross-disciplinary research to be successful in global health, a shared vision with explicit goals is essential. These goals concern knowledge integration supported by regular communication, orientation about involved disciplines, and equitable partnerships across institutions and individuals. Fostering cross-disciplinary global health research needs a significant time investment from researchers, support staff, and programme leaders. Indicators for tracking cross-disciplinary working should be agreed at the outset and monitored throughout.
Conclusion Cross-disciplinary activities should be managed separately from primary research activities. The three-component framework would be helpful in guiding designing cross-disciplinary programmes.
What is already known?
Global health can be advanced by cross-disciplinary collaboration within and beyond the health sciences.
Individual researchers, research team leaders, academic institutions and research funders all have roles in making cross-disciplinary research more effective.
Published evidence on actions to foster cross-disciplinary research comes mainly from high-income countries and its applicability to global health is unclear.
What are the new findings?
The cross-disciplinary aspects of research programmes need to be actively managed.
Pre-agreed indicators should be used to plan and track cross-disciplinary research.
Fostering cross-disciplinary research and managing tensions takes time and explicit continuous discussions.
Our adapted three-component framework (i.e., planning, implementation and management) is useful for collecting and analysing multi-source and multi-perspective data on a cross-disciplinary programme in real-time.
What do the new findings imply?
Cross-disciplinary activities should be managed and tracked separately from the primary research activities.
Progress in research planning, implementation, and management should be reviewed against pre-agreed indicators, with troubleshooting conducted accordingly.
Cross-disciplinary research requires the allocation of more time and funds for active management of research planning than would be required for mono-disciplinary projects.
The three-component framework would be helpful in guiding the design of cross-disciplinary programmes.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (project reference 16/136/35) using UK aid from the UK Government to support global health research. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the UK Department of Health and Social Care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was provided by the Research Ethics Committee of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (Reference: 18-031).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Yan.Ding{at}lstmed.ac.uk
Ewan.Tomeny{at}lstmed.ac.uk
Imelda.Bates{at}lstmed.ac.uk
Data Availability
The present study includes selected quotes to represent the content and themes across interviews. While requests for additional de-identified transcripts can be made to the authors, full interview transcripts cannot be made available as to do so would compromise anonymity and violate the terms of our ethical approval.
