RFI Evidence-base

Suggested literature as evidence per Domain, Topic and Indicator
The resources listed on this website are intended to provide readers with general information about current existing documents – including guidelines, principles and policies – relating to partnerships in research. While these documents are intended to increase awareness of existing literature and information in this regard, COHRED does not promote any particular value judgements or political standings regarding the information contained. It is suggested that RFI Report Teams review the documents and apply what is useful and relevant to their organisational context.
Please note that the references listed on this website are regularly updated. If you are aware of any additional references that you feel are relevant for the RFI indicators, please feel free to contact us at rfi@cohred.org and make us aware of them.

General literature

Review Papers

Additional Guidelines on Partnerships

Domain 1: Fairness of Opportunity

1.1. Relevance to communities

The ethics of research related to healthcare in developing countries: follow-up paper – Nuffield Council on Bioethics (p. 57 – community participation; p. 63 – Setting priorities)

The WHO strategy on research for health – 2012

A checklist for health research priority setting: nine common themes of good practice.

On the agenda: North–South research partnerships and agenda-setting processes

The bureaucratic context of international health: A social scientists view

Indicators

1.1.1. Research priorities in communities where research is being conducted

1.1.2. Actions if there are no research priorities

1.1.3. Justification to research low priority topics


1. 2. Early engagement of partners

Indicators

1.2.1. Relationship between the ‘main/lead/sponsoring’ and ‘other’ partners

1.2.2. SOPs for partner inclusion in study design

1.2.3. SOPs for supportive actions to partners


1.3. Making contributions of all partners explicit

Indicators

1.3.1. Role clarification in research partnerships

1.3.2. SOPs for conflict resolution

1.3.3. Making potential impact explicit before starting research


1. 4.  Ensuring that matching and other co-financing mechanisms do not undermine opportunities for fair participation of all partners

Commission on Health Research for Development (HRfD). 1990.Health research: Essential Link to Equity in Development. (p. 29-36)

Co-financing for health and development – an affordable innovation

Indicators

1.4.1. Equal co-financing

1.4.2. Alternatives to equal co-financing.

1.4.3. Research outside national priorities and co-financing.

 


 

1. 5.  Recognition of unequal research management capacities between partners and providing for appropriate corrective measures

Science and technology for wealth and health in developing countries

IRD – Capacity Building

The ethics of research related to healthcare in developing countries: follow-up paper – Nuffield Council on Bioethics (p. 58)

Indicators

1.5.1. Research Management Capacity.

1.5.2. Financial Management Capacity.

1.5.3. Contracting and Contract Negotiation capacity.

 

 

Domain 2: Fair Process

2. 6.  Minimizing negative impact of research programmes on health and other systems

Describing the impact of health research: a Research Impact Framework

Indicators

2.6.1. Assessing potential harm of research.

2.6.2. Reducing negative impact of research.

2.6.3. Compensation for unintended (negative) consequences of research.

 


 

2. 7.  Fair local hiring, training and sourcing

Changing mindsets: Research capacity strengthening in low- and middle- income countries

IRD – Capacity Building

The ethics of research related to healthcare in developing countries: follow-up paper – Nuffield Council on Bioethics (p. 58)

Strengthening capacity for health research in Africa

Enabling Dynamic Partnerships through Joint Degrees between Low- and High-Income Countries for Capacity Development in Global Health Research: Experience from the Karolinska Institutet/Makerere University Partnership

Indicators

2.7.1. Local staffing.

2.7.2. Local sourcing of consumables and services.

2.7.3. Support for local capacity development.

 


 

2. 8.  Respect for authority of local ethics review systems

Indicators

2.8.1. Research Ethics Approval.

2.8.2. Supporting local Research Ethics Review capacity.

2.8.3. Enabling access to global expertise.

 


 

2. 9. Data ownership, storage, access and use

Data Sharing for Public Health: Key Lessons from Other Sectors

Best Practices for Ethical Sharing of Individual-Level Health Research Data From Low- and Middle-Income Settings

Indicators

2.9.1. Data Ownership Agreements.

2.9.2. Material Transfer Agreements.

2.9.3. Rights of Use of Data for Publication.

 


 

2. 10.  Encourage full cost recovery budgeting and compensation for all partners

World Bank World Development Report 1993: Investing in Health.

Indicators

2.10.1. Full Cost Recovery Budgeting.

2.10.2. Improving/Standardizing Budgeting.

2.10.3. External Financial Audit.

 

Domain 3: Fair Sharing of Benefits, Costs and Outcomes

3.11. Research systems capacities

IRD – Capacity Building

The ethics of research related to healthcare in developing countries: follow-up paper – Nuffield Council on Bioethics (p. 58)

Strengthening Research Capacity—TDR’s Evolving Experience in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Indicators

3.11.1. Training.

3.11.2. Research Management.

3.11.3. Increase (Predictable) Funding.

 


 

3. 12.  Intellectual property rights and tech transfer

Guidelines on Intellectual Property (IP) Management in International Research Collaboration Agreements

The ethics of research related to healthcare in developing countries: follow-up paper – Nuffield Council on Bioethics (p. 62 – IP)

Indicators

3.12.1. Technology Transfer

3.12.2. Sharing Intellectual Property Rights

3.12.3. Contracting Support for IPR

 


 

3. 13.  Innovation system capacities

Indicators

3.13.1. Localizing innovation.

3.13.2. Financing to link Research with Innovation.

3.13.3. Support Innovation Culture.

 


 

3.14.  Due diligence

Indicators

3.14.1. Promoting participation of women in science and innovation.

3.14.2. Negative environmental impact.

3.14.3. Achieving SDGs.


 

3.15.  Expectation of all partners to adhere to a best practice standard in research collaborations

  • Draft National Guidelines for Biomedical and Health Research involving Human Participants – Indian Council of Medical Research (2016, p. 129-132) 

Indicators

3.15.1. Partner Requirements for Fair Research Partnerships.

3.15.2. Sponsor Requirements for Fair Research Partnerships.

3.15.3. Fair Research Contracting

 

Innovation or creative concept with a hand hold a lightbulb