Skip to main content

Table 5 Recommendations for different stakeholders to improve health RCS evaluation*

From: Indicators for tracking programmes to strengthen health research capacity in lower- and middle-income countries: a qualitative synthesis

Recommendation Funding agencies Priority decision-makers Producers Users Evaluators
  International National International organizations National research councils Institutions (universities, research institutes, NGOs), networks Researchers (established and learning) International organizations National and sub-national health services  
Adequate allocation of resources to quality evaluation research alongside investments in the quality of the science, scientists, and science communication. +++ ++   ++      
Systematic attention to indicator framing, selection, measurement (multiple data sources and valid standards to enhance quality), and analysis. + +    ++ ++ + + +++
Development of indicators which better encompass relationships with knowledge users.    ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++
Disaggregation of indicator data according to equity categories. + +    ++ ++ ++ ++ +++
Systematic consideration of assumptions, pre-conditions, or measurement confounders associated with the evaluations.       ++    +++
Greater attention to evaluation design, use of clear conceptual frameworks, systematic linkage of indicators in keeping with theories of change. + +     ++    +++
Development of comprehensive, prospective systems for health RCS indicator monitoring and evaluation, in which long-term impact is considered throughout the entire project cycle. ++ ++ + + ++ ++ + + ++
Separation out of three components of the upper level– provincial-national research environment, international-global research environment, and research networks. ++ ++ ++ ++ + + +   +++
  1. *Role designated as + small, ++ medium, or +++ large.