Engagement of health research institutions in knowledge translation in the Eastern Mediterranean Region

Background: Health research institutions in the Eastern Mediterranean Region [EMR] can play an integral role in promoting and supporting Knowledge Translation [KT]. Assessing institutions' engagement in KT and bridging the "research-policy" gap is important in designing context-specific strategies to promote KT and informing funding efforts in the region.

Aims: The objective of this study was to explore the engagement of EMR institutions in KT activities.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey of institutions undertaking health research in the 22 EMR countries was undertaken. The survey covered institutional characteristics, institutional planning for research, national planning for health research, and knowledge management, translation and dissemination.

Results: 575 institutions were contacted of which 223 [38.3%] responded. Half the sampled institutions reported conducting priority-setting exercises, with 60.2% not following a standardized approach. Less than half institutions reported frequently/ always [40.5%] involving policymakers and stakeholders in setting priorities for research on health. Only 26.5% of respondent institutions reported that they examine the extent to which health policymakers utilize their research results. Moreover, only 23.3% reported measuring the impact of their health research.

Conclusions: There is still misalignment between national health research priorities and actual research production, and KT activities are still rarely undertaken by institutions in the EMR. National governments and international funding agencies are called to support research production and translation in the EMR. Institutions and researchers are also called to produce policy-relevant research and be responsive to the needs and priorities of policy-makers.

Health research institutional mapping: an Eastern Mediterranean Regional perspective

Background: Research-conducive environments are mandatory for planning, implementing and translating research findings into evidence-informed health policies. Aim: This study aimed at comprehensive situation analysis of health research institutions in the Region. Methods: We collected data on: institutional characteristics, research scope, capacity building, ethics, governance and resources. Results: We contacted 575 institutions, of which, 223 [38.8%] responded, indicating that they conducted population research [82%]. Reported studies were mostly in medicine, public health and epidemiology, while reported capacity building mainly focused on scientific writing [20.6%], research proposal writing [18%] and quantitative research methods [17%]. Most institutions reported having collaborating partners [82%] – predominantly national [77%]. Sixty-four percent of institutions received their own funding, with 48% reporting always having access to national databases. Conclusion: Governments in the Eastern Mediterranean Region and international funding agencies are called upon to support health research production through increasing allocated support and capacity building in health research

Assessment of World Health Organization Collaborating Centres in the Eastern Mediterranean Region

Following in-house training, there was a need for assessing perceived performance of World Health Organization [WHO] collaborating centres in the Eastern Mediterranean Region, with special relevance to WHO's programme of work. Thus, a questionnaire was shared with responsible officers covering: selection process, frequency of communication, monitoring mechanisms, key delivered activities, and identified gaps during implementation. These included: tendency to implement regular activities, weak technical capacity and communication, and discrepancies between planned activities and actual implementation. Recommendations for centres included: establishing communication plan/modalities, selecting activities of global/regional nature, and mobilizing resources for work plan implementation. Recommendations for responsible officers included: carefully explaining updated WHO rules and regulations; ensuring that specific terms of reference are set as per WHO's global/regional mandates; setting up regular communication mechanisms; agreeing on regular monitoring and coordination modalities; and ensuring that redesignation planning takes place during the 4th year of prior designation period