Research Mentorship in Low and Middle-Income Countries: A Global Qualitative Evidence Synthesis of Data from a Crowdsourcing Open Call and Scoping Review

Abstract

Introduction: Research mentorship is critical for advancing science, but there are few practical strategies for cultivating research mentorship in 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 strategies to enhance research mentorship in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) institutions. Methods: 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 pre-defined the approach in a protocol. We extracted studies focused on enhancing 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 CERQUAL approach. Results: The open call solicited 123 practical strategies and the scoping review identified 73 studies. We identified three broad trends related to engaging institutions across the life cycle of research mentorship, leveraging existing resources for research and training to expand research mentorship, and strengthening monitoring and evaluation of research mentorship programs. We identified the following strategies to enhance research mentorship: recognizing 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). Interpretation: Research mentorship can be strengthened in resource-limited institutions. The evidence from this open call and scoping review informed a WHO/TDR practical guide. More research mentorship programs are needed in LMIC institutions.

Development of a research mentorship guide and consensus statement for low- and middle-income countries: Results of a modified Delphi process

“…This study employed a two-round modified Delphi process informed by a related scoping review [ 11 ] crowdsourcing open call and an in-person conference [ 12 ]. The Delphi process has been widely used to achieve consensus in a structured way.…”