Capacity-sharing for improved filtering of information for decision-making in the African context

Article type
Authors
Stewart R1, Langer L1, Zaranyika H1, Choge I1, Erasmus Y1, Jordaan S1, Mitchell J1, Gerald L1
1University of Johannesburg, South Africa
Abstract
Introduction: There is limited capacity in systematic reviewing and evidence-use in low- and middle-income countries, particularly across Africa. This is reflected in the Global Evidence Synthesis Initiative (GESI) in which Cochrane plays a leading role. There are however significant pockets of capacity. The Africa Evidence Network, which we coordinate, seeks to build capacity by supporting existing initiatives that aim to filter information for better decisions in health care and other fields, amongst researchers, governments and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). This presentation will describe our activities, approaches and our preliminary evaluation, and invite the audience to share their own experiences.
Background: The Network was formed in 2012 in an attempt to bring together these disparate initiatives and provide a forum for collaboration and capacity-development. Since 2014 the Network has been supported by the UK Department for International Development via our University of Johannesburg’s ‘Building Capacity to Use Research Evidence’ initiative. This BCURE programme supports the Africa Evidence Network website, regular newsletters and biannual Colloquia. We also run a capacity-building programme to increase use of research by the governments of Malawi and South Africa.
Key Approaches:
1. A southern-based initiative, consciously avoiding ‘parachuting in’, instead working to ensure we build lasting relationships with the communities in which we work.
2. Using multiple media to exchange knowledge, including face-to-face interactions, social networks, podcasts etc., thus optimizing access to knowledge and networks beyond sectoral expertise.
3. Taking great care to ensure we build on existing initiatives, capacities and resources, to ensure we meet real needs and truly contribute to current capacity in research-use rather than merely replicating, duplicating or contradicting current efforts.
4. Avoiding the practice of training the trainers and instead adopting an apprenticeship approach.
5. Playing the role of matchmakers, fostering meaningful networks of research-users, research-producers and intermediaries in the countries in which we work.