This paper provides a general guide to presenting qualitative research for publication in a way that has meaning for authors and readers, is acceptable to editors and reviewers, and meets criteria for high standards of qualitative research reporting across the board. We discuss the writing of all sections of an article, placing particular emphasis on how you might best present your findings, illustrating our points with examples drawn from previous issues of this Journal.
Knowledge and attitude towards Ebola and Marburg virus diseases in Uganda using quantitative and participatory epidemiology techniquesby Luke Nyakarahuka, Eystein Skjerve, Daisy Nabadda, Doreen Chilolo Sitali, Chisoni Mumba, Frank N. Mwiine5, Julius J. Lutwama, Stephen Balinandi, Trevor Shoemaker, Clovice Kankya
Useful paper which uses mixed qualitative and quantitative methods to consider knowledge and practices around ebola and marburg virus in Uganda
Unintended consequences of the ‘bushmeat ban’ in West Africa during the 2013–2016 Ebola virus disease epidemicby Jesse Bonwitt, Michael Dawson, Martin Kandeh, Rashid Ansumana, Foday Sahr, Hannah Brown, Ann H. Kelly
This interesting article uses qualitative research to consider the impacts of the bushmeat ban, and consider whether illegalising bushmeat had the desired effect. Useful, interesting paper for anyone with an interest in the ebola virus and how to encourage behaviour change.
This helpful presentation is the result of a workshop held in Durban by The Global Health Bioethics Network (course facilitators: Maureen Kelley, Patricia Kingori, Dorcas Kamuya, Mike Parker).
Conducting good, ethical global health research is now more important than ever. Increased global mobility and connectivity mean that in today’s world there is no such thing as ‘local health’. As a collection, these stories offer a flexible resource for training across a variety of contexts, such as medical research organizations, universities, collaborative sites, and NGOs.
Gender analysis entails researchers seeking to understand gender power relations and norms and their implications, including the nature of women’s, men’s, and people of other gender’s lives, how their needs and experiences differ, the causes and consequences of these differences, and how services and polices might address these differences.
Understanding the investigators: a qualitative study investigating the barriers and enablers to the implementation of local investigator-initiated clinical trials in Ethiopiaby Sam Franzen
New BMJ Open article: “Understanding the investigators: a qualitative study investigating the barriers and enablers to the implementation of local investigator-initiated clinical trials in Ethiopia” This article was written by the research team at Global Health Trials in collaboration with researchers from Ethopia, Sri Lanka and Peru. The research was initiated in response to the low volume of clinical trials conducted by investigators in Low and Middle Income Countries.
This guide, developed by the WHO and released in December 2013, aims to facilitate implementation research in LMICs.
Research misconduct is a global problem as research is a global activity. Wherever there is human activity there is misconduct, but we lack reliable data on the extent and distribution of research misconduct. This PLoS paper seeks to illustrate some examples of researsch misconduct in LMICs.
Universities in Cameroon are playing an active part in HIV/AIDS research and much of this research is carried out by students, usually for the purpose of a dissertation/thesis. Student theses/dissertations present research findings in a much more comprehensive manner and have been described as the stepping-stone of a budding scientist's potential in becoming an independent researcher. It is therefore important to verify how students handle issues of research ethics.
The border between Thailand and Burma (Myanmar) is at the forefront of the global battle against malaria, and is an important site for research.
Abstract Post-Human Genome Project progress has enabled a new wave of population genetic research, and intensified controversy over the use of race/ethnicity in this work. At the same time, the development of methods for inferring genetic ancestry offers more empirical means of assigning group labels. Here, we provide a systematic analysis of the use of race/ethnicity and ancestry in current genetic research. We base our analysis on key published recommendations for the use and reporting of race/ethnicity which advise that researchers: explain why the terms/categories were used and how they were measured, carefully define them, and apply them consistently. We studied 170 population genetic research articles from high impact journals, published 2008–2009. A comparative perspective was obtained by aligning study metrics with similar research from articles published 2001–2004. Our analysis indicates a marked improvement in compliance with some of the recommendations/guidelines for the use of race/ethnicity over time, while showing that important shortfalls still remain: no article using ‘race’, ‘ethnicity’ or ‘ancestry’ defined or discussed the meaning of these concepts in context; a third of articles still do not provide a rationale for their use, with those using ‘ancestry’ being the least likely to do so. Further, no article discussed potential socio-ethical implications of the reported research. As such, there remains a clear imperative for highlighting the importance of consistent and comprehensive reporting on human populations to the genetics/genomics community globally, to generate explicit guidelines for the uses of ancestry and genetic ancestry, and importantly, to ensure that guidelines are followed.