03502nas a2200385   4500000000100000008004100001260001200042653002900054653001800083653002200101653001100123100001400134700001500148700001300163700001300176700001100189700002500200700001500225700001300240700001800253700001100271700001200282700001200294700001300306700001600319700001100335700001400346700001300360245017300373856005800546300000900604490000600613520248300619022001403102       2024                            d  c01/202410aHealth Services Research10aPublic health10aQualitative study10aReview1 aKpokiri E1 aMcDonald K1 aAbraha Y1 aOsorio L1 aNath T1 aTalavera-Urdanivia V1 aAkinwale O1 aManabe Y1 aCastelnuovo B1 aTang W1 aYilma D1 aMihut M1 aEzechi O1 aIwelunmor J1 aKaba M1 aAbdissa A1 aTucker J00aHealth research mentorship in low-income and middle-income countries: a global qualitative evidence synthesis of data from a crowdsourcing open call and scoping review.  uhttps://gh.bmj.com/content/bmjgh/9/1/e011166.full.pdf  a1-100 v93 a<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Research mentorship is critical for advancing science, but there are few practical strategies for cultivating mentorship in health research resource-limited settings. WHO/TDR Global commissioned a group to develop a practical guide on research mentorship. This global qualitative evidence synthesis included data from a crowdsourcing open call and scoping review to identify and propose strategies to enhance research mentorship in low/middle-income country (LMIC) institutions.</p>

<p><strong>Methods: </strong>The crowdsourcing open call used methods recommended by WHO/TDR and solicited descriptions of strategies to enhance research mentorship in LMICs. The scoping review used the Cochrane Handbook and predefined the approach in a protocol. We extracted studies focused on enhancing health research mentorship in LMICs. Textual data describing research mentorship strategies from the open call and studies from the scoping review were coded into themes. The quality of evidence supporting themes was assessed using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach.</p>

<p><strong>Results: </strong>The open call solicited 46 practical strategies and the scoping review identified 77 studies. We identified the following strategies to enhance research mentorship: recognising mentorship as an institutional responsibility that should be provided and expected from all team members (8 strategies, 15 studies; moderate confidence); leveraging existing research and training resources to enhance research mentorship (15 strategies, 49 studies; moderate confidence); digital tools to match mentors and mentees and sustain mentorship relations over time (14 strategies, 11 studies; low confidence); nurturing a culture of generosity so that people who receive mentorship then become mentors to others (7 strategies, 7 studies; low confidence); peer mentorship defined as informal and formal support from one researcher to another who is at a similar career stage (16 strategies, 12 studies; low confidence).</p>

<p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Research mentorship is a collective institutional responsibility, and it can be strengthened in resource-limited institutions by leveraging already existing resources. The evidence from the crowdsourcing open call and scoping review informed a WHO/TDR practical guide. There is a need for more formal research mentorship programmes in LMIC institutions.</p>
  a2059-7908