How well are we really doing? The HIV/AIDS Mentoring Programme five years on

Tags: Oral
de Kock A, Siegfried N, Oliver J, Kennedy G, Hovarth T

Background: The South African Cochrane Centre (SACC) and the Cochrane HIV/AIDS Group Mentoring Programme was established in 2000. The programme aims to develop capacity among African researchers to complete Cochrane reviews on HIV/AIDS-related topics relevant to their communities. Novice authors are paired with an experienced reviewer to guide the process and to assist methodologically. In 2006 a Cochrane Collaboration Discretionary Fund grant was awarded to the Programme to undertake a formal evaluation.

Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of the programme five years after its inception. To provide recommendations for improving productivity and the experience of conducting reviews in resource-poor settings.

Methods: The study is quantitative and qualitative. Time-to-review completion was quantified from secondary data analyses of programme material. The qualitative study led by an external evaluator is under way. Twenty in-depth key informant interviews are being conducted with authors and mentors using a semi-structured questionnaire. Questions include motivation for, and experience of undertaking a review; expectations and experience of the programme and the mentoring process; the usefulness of programme resources; and the authors' institutional support. Interviews are conducted in person or by telephone. Key members of the SACC and the Cochrane HIV/AIDS Group will also be interviewed. The qualitative data will be analysed using grounded theory and a thematic approach.

Results: Since 2000 the Programme has provided mentoring to 20 authors from Kenya, Uganda, Nigeria and South Africa. Eleven mentors from five countries participate. Mean time to review completion is 35 months, range 25 - 59 months (n = 4); mean time to protocol completion is 21 months, range 3 - 45 months (n = 12). A comparison between these findings and other non-mentored reviews will be presented as will the qualitative results.

Conclusions: The results of this evaluation will provide important insights into the needs of novice authors and the mentoring processes. This will provide data for improving existing processes and ideas for replicating successful aspects of the programme to other Cochrane entities.