Exploring best practice governance for EU-funded health research consortia: A qualitative study protocol for insight and ideation
Renker-Darby, A.; Bärnighausen, T.; Neumann, C.; Preet, R.; Treskova, M.
Show abstract
BackgroundInternational consortia have emerged as a common model to organise and fund large-scale, multi-disciplinary research in contemporary health and biomedical science. The diversity of participants, size and complexity of these consortia necessitates effective governance to achieve their research aims and societal impact. For health research consortia funded by the European Union, certain governance structures and processes have emerged out of convention. However, there is limited scientific evidence to support their use, and little is known about consortia participants perspectives on how governance structures could be improved to better serve the implementation of research. In this paper, we present a protocol for a qualitative study to explore the perspectives of participants in European Union-funded health research consortia on the value of governance structures and how they might be improved. Methods and analysisWe will conduct a qualitative study using in-depth interviews with participants in health research consortia funded by the European Union. We will recruit participants following a purposeful sampling approach, and recruitment will continue until saturation is reached. During in-depth interviews, we will ask participants about how the governance of consortia is structured and what is working well or poorly about those governance structures from their perspective. We will draw on design thinking methods to help participants to ideate improvements in governance structures. Data will be analysed using a thematic analysis approach. DiscussionFindings from this study will provide valuable evidence for developing and formulating governance structures for health research consortia. The findings of this work may also contribute to guidelines for consortium proposal submissions.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The use of the positive deviance approach for healthcare system service improvement: A scoping review protocol 94%
- Key factors for effective implementation of healthcare workers support interventions in health organisations after patient safety incidents: a protocol for a scoping review 94%
- Ethnicity and COVID-19 outcomes among healthcare workers in the United Kingdom: UK-REACH ethico-legal research, qualitative research on healthcare workers’ experiences, and stakeholder engagement protocol 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Protocol for a scoping review investigating success in research capacity building for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals 94%
- Process of Use of Evidence Products by Frontline Maternal, Newborn and Child Health Staff at the Facility Level in Ghana. 94%
- From many voices, one question: Community co-design of a population-based qualitative cancer research study 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Factors affecting trust in clinical trials conduct: Views of stakeholders from a qualitative study in Ghana 94%
- An emerging TIMER-2C framework for addressing barriers to research culture and productivity among local healthcare providers in the Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa: a qualitative study and modified Delphi approach 94%
- Mentorship in Health Research Institutions in Africa: A Systematic Review of Approaches, Benefits, Successes, Gaps and Challenges 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Systematic Review: The Dimensions and Indicators utilized in the Performance Evaluation of Health Care Organizations- An Implication during COVID-19 Pandemic 93%
- ‘Leading from the front’ implementation strategies increase the success of influenza vaccination drives among healthcare workers: A reanalysis of Systematic Review evidence using Intervention Component Analysis (ICA) and Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) 93%
- The Impact for implementing Balanced Scorecard in Health Care Organizations: A Systematic Review 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Following the science? Views from scientists on government advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study in five European countries 94%
- Designathons in Health Research: A Global Systematic Review 93%
- A double-edged sword - Telemedicine for maternal care during COVID-19: Findings from a global mixed methods study of healthcare providers 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.