Saltar al contenido principal

ETHNOS_APP

Inicio • Búsqueda • Revistas • Lista 0

Reversing the trend

A scoping review of health innovation transfer or exchange from low- and middle-income countries to high-income countries

Datos Bibliográficos

ID21881043
AutoresSage Marie Consolatrice Ishimwe (0000-0001-9928-5891, University of Global Health Equity, autor de correspondencia), Jepchirchir Kiplagat (0000-0002-7836-2138, AMPATH), Arina Kadam Knowlton (0000-0002-3180-0022, National Institutes of Health), Alicia A Livinski (0000-0002-7201-3500, National Institutes of Health), Linda E Kupfer (0000-0002-6886-6818, National Institutes of Health)
Año2023
Volumen8
NúmeroSuppl 7
Páginase013583
Fecha de publicación2023-11-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaBMJ Global Health (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 2059-7908 • E-ISSN: 2059-7908
EditorialBMJ (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1136/bmjgh-2023-013583
PMID37967892
OpenAlexW4388693786
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas4
Referencias citadas32

The transfer of innovations from low and middle-income countries (LMICs) to high-income countries (HICs) has received little attention, leaving gaps in the understanding of the process, its benefits and the factors influencing it. This scoping review, part of a National Institutes of Health (NIH) project and the focus for a 2022 NIH-sponsored workshop on Global Health Reciprocal Innovation, sought to identify publications describing health innovations that were researched, developed and implemented in LMICs and adapted to address similar health challenges in HICs. A protocol was written a priori and registered on Open Science Framework. Four databases were searched for articles published in English from 2000 to 2022 and described health innovations developed in LMICs and were transferred to HICs. Using Covidence, two reviewers initially screened the title and abstract and then the full text; discrepancies were resolved through discussion. Two reviewers collected the data from each article using Covidence and Microsoft Excel; discrepancies were resolved by a separate third reviewer. 7191 records were retrieved and screened of which 12 studies were included. Various frameworks and methodologies were employed in these studies, with a particular emphasis on adaptation and adoption of innovations. The review uncovered different paradigms of LMIC to HIC innovation transfer and exchange, including unidirectional transfers from LMICs to HICs as well as bidirectional or multidirectional mutually beneficial exchanges. The use of both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods was common across all the included articles. Facilitators for innovation transfers included stakeholder engagement, relevance of local context, simplicity, and sufficient funding, promotion and branding. Barriers to transfers were mostly the opposite of the facilitators. Our results highlighted the underexplored field of LMIC to HIC innovation transfer and exchange and lay the foundation for future research studies

Business · Political science · Public relations · Stakeholder · Biomedical and Engineering Education · Global Health and Surgery · Health and Medical Research Impacts · Medicine

  • Global health reciprocal innovation

    Open Access•Annette Rid, Bernardo Aguilera et al.•BMJ Global Health•2024

  • The case for global health reciprocal innovation

    Open Access•Linda E Kupfer, Nalini Anand et al.•BMJ Global Health•2024

  • Student experiences and perspectives on decolonising global health education

    Open Access•Jennifer J Infanti, Jessica Omija Korpela et al.•Global Health Action•2025

  • The Impact of Social Determinants of Health, Health Resources, and Environmental Factors on Infant Mortality Rates in Three Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Countries

    Open Access•Moossa Amur Nasser Al Saidi, Mira Saidi et al.•European Journal of Investigation…•2025

  • Beyond Adoption

    Open Access•Trisha Greenhalgh, Joseph Wherton et al.•Journal of Medical Internet…•2017

  • What Makes Clinical Research in Developing Countries Ethical? The Benchmarks of Ethical Research

    Open Access•Ezekiel J Emanuel, David Wendler et al.•The Journal of Infectious Diseases•2004

  • Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach

    Open Access•Zachary Munn, Micah D J Peters et al.•BMC Medical Research Methodology•2018

  • Benefiting the NHS through innovation

    Open Access•Hamdi Issa, William Townsend et al.•BMJ Global Health•2021

  • Global health reciprocal innovation

    Open Access•Annette Rid, Bernardo Aguilera et al.•BMJ Global Health•2024

  • From Kisiizi to Baltimore

    Open Access•for the Baltimore CONNECT Project Team, Chidinma A Ibe et al.•Globalization and Health•2018

  • ‘They hear “Africa” and they think that there can’t be any good services’ – perceived context in cross-national learning

    Open Access•Matthew Harris, Emily Weisberger et al.•Globalization and Health•2015

  • That’s not how the learning works – the paradox of Reverse Innovation

    Open Access•Matthew Harris, Emily Weisberger et al.•Globalization and Health•2016

  • A model for ‘reverse innovation’ in health care

    Open Access•Jacqueline W DePasse, Patrick T Lee•Globalization and Health•2013

  • Power, potential, and pitfalls in global health academic partnerships

    Open Access•David Citrin, Stephen Mehanni et al.•Global Health Action•2017

  • Reciprocal innovation

    Open Access•Thomas G Sors, Rishika Chauhan O’Brien et al.•Global Public Health•2022

Obras citantes distintas4
Citas por año2
Intervalo de citas2024 - 2025 (2)
Velocidad de citaciónrecent
Altamente citadoNo
Tipos de citaNeutras: 4
Ethnos_APP • Proyecto Open Source • Licencia MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidad y Cookies • Documentación de la API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código de la API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código del Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae