RFI Evidence Base

Welcome to the RFI Evidence Base!
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.


Below is an overview of the RFI reporting guide. Please note that under each topic, there are also 3 specific indicators.



1.1. Relevance To Communities – in which research is done
1.2. Early Engagement of Partners
1.3. Making Contributions of All Partners Explicit – Fair Research Contracting
1.4. Ensuring That Matching and Other Co-Financing Mechanisms Do Not
Undermine Opportunities For Fair Participation of All Partners
1.5. Recognition of Unequal Research Management Capacities Between
Partners And Providing For Appropriate Corrective Measures 



2.6. Minimizing Negative Impact of Research Programmes On Health And
Other Systems
2.7. Fair Local Hiring, Training And Sourcing
2.8. Respect For Authority of Local Ethics Review Systems
2.9. Data Ownership, Storage, Access And Use
2.10. Encourage Full Cost Recovery Budgeting And Compensation For All



3.11. Research System Capacities
3.12. Intellectual Property Rights And Tech Transfer
3.13. Innovation System Capacities
3.14. Due Diligence
3.15. Expectation Of All Partners To Adhere To A Best Practice Standard
In Research Collaborations

By using the list below, you will be able to access links to literature that we feel is relevant to each domain, topic and indicator. Once you have selected an option from the list, click on the numbered indicators that appear below the drop-down menu to view literature related to them.

Find evidence by choosing an option from the drop-down list below:

  • Domains, Topics and Indicators

  • Reset
Found 66 Results
Page 1 of 7

Topic 1.1: Relevance to communities

General literature The ethics of research related to healthcare in developing countries: follow-up paper – Nuffield Council on Bioethics (p. 57 – community participation;Read More…

May 30, 2017

Indicator 1.1.1: Research priorities in communities where research is being conducted

TOP SUGGESTIONS Global code of conduct for research in resource-poor settings CIOMS International Ethical Guidelines for Health-Related Research Involving Humans (2016, p. 16-19) TheRead More…

Indicator 1.1.2: Actions if there are no research priorities

TOP SUGGESTIONS Priority setting for research for health: A management process for countries.  Global Observatory on Health R&D Working paper series 1 (preliminary draft)Read More…

Indicator 1.1.3: Justification to research low priority topics

TOP SUGGESTIONS Setting priorities for global mental health research.  Low Priority of Cardiovascular and Chronic Diseases on the Global Health Agenda. Low Priority ofRead More…

Topic 1. 2: Early engagement of partners

Partnership Building: Practical Tools to Help You Create, Strengthen, Assess and Manage Your Partnership or Alliance More Productively Good Practices in Educational Partnerships Guide

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

TOP SUGGESTIONS KFPE’s Guide for Transboundary Research Partnerships  A checklist for health research priority setting: nine common themes of good practice.  Cross-cultural research: TryingRead More…

Indicator 1.2.3: SOPs for supportive actions to partners

TOP SUGGESTIONS ESSENCE – Seven principles for strengthening research capacity in low- and middle-income countries: simple ideas in a complex world (see Guideline 6).Read More…

Topic 1.3: Making contributions of all partners explicit

Evaluating Collaboratives Good Practices in Educational Partnerships Guide Addressing the tensions and complexities involved in commissioning and undertaking implementation research in low- and middle-incomeRead More…

July 4, 2017

Indicator 1.3.1: Role clarification in research partnerships

TOP SUGGESTIONS KFPE Guidelines Marais, D., Toohey, J., Edwards, D., & IJsselmuiden, C. (2013). Where there is no lawyer: Guidance for fairer contract negotiationRead More…

Page 1 of 7