An analysis of the African cancer research ecosystem: tackling disparities

Abstract

Disparities in cancer research persist around the world. This is especially true in global health research, where high-income countries (HICs) continue to set global health priorities further creating several imbalances in how research is conducted in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Cancer research disparities in Africa can be attributed to a vicious cycle of challenges in the research ecosystem ranging from who funds research, where research is conducted, who conducts it, what type of research is conducted and where and how it is disseminated. For example, the funding chasm between HICs and LMICs contributes to inequities and parachutism in cancer research. Breaking the current cancer research model necessitates a thorough examination of why current practices and norms exist and the identification of actionable ways to improve them. The cancer research agenda in Africa should be appropriate for the African nations and continent. Empowering African researchers and ensuring local autonomy are two critical steps in moving cancer research towards this new paradigm.

Is qualitative social research in global health fulfilling its potential?: a systematic evidence mapping of research on point-of-care testing in low- and middle-income contexts

“…The context of the reported studies—including the funding sources, where research is done, by whom, and where research is published—is important for understanding the global health research ecosystem within which the purpose and scope of research is formulated, [ 37 ] A majority of papers reported on studies carried out within the context of a trial or intervention, suggesting that qualitative research has been brought in primarily to answer questions about implementation-related variables, e.g., feasibility and acceptability, and potentially omitting critical questions that social scientists might pose, such as those pertaining to the broader structural conditions in which POCTs are prioritised, funded, developed and deployed, or the ways in which POCTs reconfigure power relationships in medicine (see e.g., [ 38 – 42 ]). Ethnographic methods are especially well-suited to unearthing these social and political dimensions of global health technologies [ 9 , 43 – 45 ] and have been shown to be essential to better understand the lived experience and everyday workings of health systems and technologies in real-world settings (e.g., [ 2 , 10 – 12 ]).…”

Is neocolonialism existing in global surgery practice? An analysis of a web-based survey amongst global surgery practitioners

“…23 It has been noted that the African Union in 2007 committed to investing at least 1% of gross domestic product (GDP) in research and development but 15 years later, no country had achieved that goal. 24 Available data shows that sub-Saharan Africa invests 0.44% of GDP in research and development compared to 3.32% in north America, 2.28% in the European Union and global average of 2.71% (Table 4). 25…”

African scientists call for research equity as a cancer crisis looms

“…One way of dealing with the uneven playing field is to design new collaborations between African researchers and colleagues in highincome countries. Maintaining equity is difficult, given the disparities in resources, says Rubagumya, who is lead author of a 2023 study 4 that describes a "vicious cycle of challenges in the research ecosystem" that maintains an imbalance towards high-income nations.…”