MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414820788 · doi:10.36368/jcsh.v2i1.1261

Barriers and opportunities to disseminate and translate evidence from implementation research and quality improvement in the context of resource limited settings

2025· article· en· W4414820788 on OpenAlexaff
Zeleke Abebaw Mekonnen, Moses Mugisha, Foday Boima, Kilongo Papy Mulailwa, Isata Dumbuya, Laban Bikorimana, Sharmistha Mishra, Jean-Gregory Jerome

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of community systems for health / · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisseminationContext (archaeology)Best practiceQuality managementQuality (philosophy)Health careSierra leoneImplementation researchHealth policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of research evidence to influence policy decisions and practice is crucial for improving health service delivery and outcomes. Effective influence requires timely dissemination and translation of evidence to practitioners and policymakers at all decision-making levels. Traditional literature on research dissemination strategies has primarily focused on the Global North, often reflecting funding structures from that region. Yet there is a wealth of research, especially operational research as well as quality improvement (QI) initiatives that have been central to programs in the Global South where health resources are often limited. This article examines the challenges and opportunities of turning research and quality improvement work into policy and practice in resource-limited settings. It draws on insights from the authors’ roles as panelists and moderators at the 3rd Annual Research and Quality Improvement Symposium, hosted by Partners In Health and the Ministry of Health of Sierra Leone on November 19, 2024. Barriers to effective dissemination of scientific evidence include limited collaboration among partners, funding constraints, visa issues and travel restrictions. Additionally, inequities in research authorship, gender disparities and language barriers hinder evidence dissemination. Building strong collaborations between policymakers and researchers presents valuable opportunities to bridge these gaps. Innovative methods such as digital platforms can also enhance dissemination despite resource limitations. Further, decolonizing global health research and ensuring equitable access to resources are critical for effective evidence sharing. Advocating for local conferences and leveraging funding mechanisms from the Global South can further support researchers in these contexts. To enhance healthcare quality in resource-limited settings, innovative strategies for sharing and implementing research and quality improvement initiatives are essential. Local researchers can utilize local knowledge, technology and partnerships to effectively disseminate findings that meet community needs. Strategic communication and collaboration among stakeholders are vital for translating research into policies that positively impact health outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.386
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.532
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.758

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3860.532
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0110.023
Scholarly communication0.0280.024
Open science0.0070.037
Research integrity0.0090.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.569
GPT teacher head0.630
Teacher spread0.061 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of community systems for health /Same topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207