Methodological gaps and opportunities for studying multisectoral collaboration for health in low- and middle-income countries

Douglas Glandon, Shinjini Mondal, Ida Okeyo, Shehla Zaidi, Mishal S. Khan, Osman Dar, Sara Bennett

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The current body of research into multisectoral collaborations (MSCs) for health raises more questions than it answers, both in terms of how to implement MSCs and how to study them. This article reflects on current methodological gaps and opportunities for advancing MSC research, based on a targeted review of existing literature and qualitative input from researchers and practitioners at the 2018 Health Systems Research (HSR) Symposium in Liverpool. Through framework analysis of 205 MSC research papers referenced in a separately published MSC 'overview of reviews' paper, this article identifies six broad MSC question domains ('meta questions') and applies content analysis to estimate the relative frequency with which these meta questions and the research method(s) used to answer them are present in the literature. Results highlight a preponderance of research exploring MSC implementation using case study methods, which, in aggregate, does not seem to adequately meet policymakers' and practitioners' needs for generalizable or transferable insights. The content analysis is complemented by qualitative insights from HSR Symposium participants and the authors' own experience to identify six key methodological gaps in research on MSC for health. For each of these gaps, we propose areas in which we believe there are opportunities for methodological development and innovation to help advance this field of study, including: better understanding the role of power dynamics in shaping MSCs; development of a classification framework (or frameworks) of governance arrangements; exploring divergence of perspective and experience among MSC partners; identifying or generating theoretical frameworks for MSC that work across sectors and disciplines; developing intermediate indicators of collaboration; and increasing transferability of insights to other contexts. Collaboration with researchers outside of the health sector will enhance efforts in each of these areas, as will the establishment and strengthening of pluralistic MSC evidence networks also involving policymakers and practitioners.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)ii7-ii17
JournalHealth policy and planning
Volume34
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2019

Fingerprint

Health
Research
Research Personnel

Keywords

  • Context
  • developing countries
  • evaluation
  • governance
  • health systems research
  • implementation
  • measurement
  • research methods
  • transdisciplinary

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

Methodological gaps and opportunities for studying multisectoral collaboration for health in low- and middle-income countries. / Glandon, Douglas; Mondal, Shinjini; Okeyo, Ida; Zaidi, Shehla; Khan, Mishal S.; Dar, Osman; Bennett, Sara.

In: Health policy and planning, Vol. 34, No. 2, 01.11.2019, p. ii7-ii17.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Glandon, Douglas ; Mondal, Shinjini ; Okeyo, Ida ; Zaidi, Shehla ; Khan, Mishal S. ; Dar, Osman ; Bennett, Sara. / Methodological gaps and opportunities for studying multisectoral collaboration for health in low- and middle-income countries. In: Health policy and planning. 2019 ; Vol. 34, No. 2. pp. ii7-ii17.
@article{ddc0a6e4f8064b7f9666e706bfb9c0bb,
title = "Methodological gaps and opportunities for studying multisectoral collaboration for health in low- and middle-income countries",
abstract = "The current body of research into multisectoral collaborations (MSCs) for health raises more questions than it answers, both in terms of how to implement MSCs and how to study them. This article reflects on current methodological gaps and opportunities for advancing MSC research, based on a targeted review of existing literature and qualitative input from researchers and practitioners at the 2018 Health Systems Research (HSR) Symposium in Liverpool. Through framework analysis of 205 MSC research papers referenced in a separately published MSC 'overview of reviews' paper, this article identifies six broad MSC question domains ('meta questions') and applies content analysis to estimate the relative frequency with which these meta questions and the research method(s) used to answer them are present in the literature. Results highlight a preponderance of research exploring MSC implementation using case study methods, which, in aggregate, does not seem to adequately meet policymakers' and practitioners' needs for generalizable or transferable insights. The content analysis is complemented by qualitative insights from HSR Symposium participants and the authors' own experience to identify six key methodological gaps in research on MSC for health. For each of these gaps, we propose areas in which we believe there are opportunities for methodological development and innovation to help advance this field of study, including: better understanding the role of power dynamics in shaping MSCs; development of a classification framework (or frameworks) of governance arrangements; exploring divergence of perspective and experience among MSC partners; identifying or generating theoretical frameworks for MSC that work across sectors and disciplines; developing intermediate indicators of collaboration; and increasing transferability of insights to other contexts. Collaboration with researchers outside of the health sector will enhance efforts in each of these areas, as will the establishment and strengthening of pluralistic MSC evidence networks also involving policymakers and practitioners.",
keywords = "Context, developing countries, evaluation, governance, health systems research, implementation, measurement, research methods, transdisciplinary",
author = "Douglas Glandon and Shinjini Mondal and Ida Okeyo and Shehla Zaidi and Khan, {Mishal S.} and Osman Dar and Sara Bennett",
year = "2019",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/heapol/czz116",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "34",
pages = "ii7--ii17",
journal = "Health Policy and Planning",
issn = "0268-1080",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Methodological gaps and opportunities for studying multisectoral collaboration for health in low- and middle-income countries

AU - Glandon, Douglas

AU - Mondal, Shinjini

AU - Okeyo, Ida

AU - Zaidi, Shehla

AU - Khan, Mishal S.

AU - Dar, Osman

AU - Bennett, Sara

PY - 2019/11/1

Y1 - 2019/11/1

N2 - The current body of research into multisectoral collaborations (MSCs) for health raises more questions than it answers, both in terms of how to implement MSCs and how to study them. This article reflects on current methodological gaps and opportunities for advancing MSC research, based on a targeted review of existing literature and qualitative input from researchers and practitioners at the 2018 Health Systems Research (HSR) Symposium in Liverpool. Through framework analysis of 205 MSC research papers referenced in a separately published MSC 'overview of reviews' paper, this article identifies six broad MSC question domains ('meta questions') and applies content analysis to estimate the relative frequency with which these meta questions and the research method(s) used to answer them are present in the literature. Results highlight a preponderance of research exploring MSC implementation using case study methods, which, in aggregate, does not seem to adequately meet policymakers' and practitioners' needs for generalizable or transferable insights. The content analysis is complemented by qualitative insights from HSR Symposium participants and the authors' own experience to identify six key methodological gaps in research on MSC for health. For each of these gaps, we propose areas in which we believe there are opportunities for methodological development and innovation to help advance this field of study, including: better understanding the role of power dynamics in shaping MSCs; development of a classification framework (or frameworks) of governance arrangements; exploring divergence of perspective and experience among MSC partners; identifying or generating theoretical frameworks for MSC that work across sectors and disciplines; developing intermediate indicators of collaboration; and increasing transferability of insights to other contexts. Collaboration with researchers outside of the health sector will enhance efforts in each of these areas, as will the establishment and strengthening of pluralistic MSC evidence networks also involving policymakers and practitioners.

AB - The current body of research into multisectoral collaborations (MSCs) for health raises more questions than it answers, both in terms of how to implement MSCs and how to study them. This article reflects on current methodological gaps and opportunities for advancing MSC research, based on a targeted review of existing literature and qualitative input from researchers and practitioners at the 2018 Health Systems Research (HSR) Symposium in Liverpool. Through framework analysis of 205 MSC research papers referenced in a separately published MSC 'overview of reviews' paper, this article identifies six broad MSC question domains ('meta questions') and applies content analysis to estimate the relative frequency with which these meta questions and the research method(s) used to answer them are present in the literature. Results highlight a preponderance of research exploring MSC implementation using case study methods, which, in aggregate, does not seem to adequately meet policymakers' and practitioners' needs for generalizable or transferable insights. The content analysis is complemented by qualitative insights from HSR Symposium participants and the authors' own experience to identify six key methodological gaps in research on MSC for health. For each of these gaps, we propose areas in which we believe there are opportunities for methodological development and innovation to help advance this field of study, including: better understanding the role of power dynamics in shaping MSCs; development of a classification framework (or frameworks) of governance arrangements; exploring divergence of perspective and experience among MSC partners; identifying or generating theoretical frameworks for MSC that work across sectors and disciplines; developing intermediate indicators of collaboration; and increasing transferability of insights to other contexts. Collaboration with researchers outside of the health sector will enhance efforts in each of these areas, as will the establishment and strengthening of pluralistic MSC evidence networks also involving policymakers and practitioners.

KW - Context

KW - developing countries

KW - evaluation

KW - governance

KW - health systems research

KW - implementation

KW - measurement

KW - research methods

KW - transdisciplinary

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074958132&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074958132&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/heapol/czz116

DO - 10.1093/heapol/czz116

M3 - Article

C2 - 31723973

AN - SCOPUS:85074958132

VL - 34

SP - ii7-ii17

JO - Health Policy and Planning

JF - Health Policy and Planning

SN - 0268-1080

IS - 2

ER -