IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0266106.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Training and mentorship as a tool for building African researchers’ capacity in knowledge translation

Author

Listed:
  • Rose N Oronje
  • Carol Mukiira
  • Elizabeth Kahurani
  • Violet Murunga

Abstract

As one of the main knowledge producers, researchers can play an important role in contributing to efforts that bridge the gap between knowledge, policy and practice. However, for researchers to play this role, they need knowledge translation (KT) capacities that many typically lack. Furthermore, research has confirmed that little is known on KT training approaches for LMICs researchers and their effectiveness. This paper seeks to contribute to filling this knowledge gap on KT training approaches for LMIC researchers by assessing the effectiveness of a training and mentorship intervention to build African researchers’ KT capacity. We conducted KT training and mentorship for 23 early and mid-career researchers from 20 universities in sub-Saharan Africa. This comprised a 5-day intense residential training workshop, followed by a 6-months mentorship. A pre- and post-training test was used to assess the immediate effect of the workshop. The intermediate effect of the training following a 6-month mentorship was assessed by the number of researchers who completed policy briefs during this period and those who participated in the webinar series conducted during this period. Overall, the aggregate average point change in the self-reported learning between the pre-training and the post-training survey was 1.9, which demonstrated the effectiveness of the training workshop. This was confirmed by a 33.7% increase in the aggregate average percentage of participants that responded correctly to questions assessing topics covered in the training between the pre-training and the post-training survey. During the mentorship period, 19 of the 23 researchers prepared and submitted complete drafts of their policy briefs within two months after the training. Fewer (4) researchers revised and submitted final policy briefs. More than half of the trained researchers participated in the webinars conducted in the first three months of the mentorship, whereas less than half of the researchers participated in the webinars conducted in the last three months. KT training and mentorship can be an effective intervention for addressing researchers’ KT capacity gaps. For sustainability, KT training and mentorship need to be integrated in graduate training programmes in universities so that future LMIC researchers leave training institutions with the KT capacities they need for influencing policy and programme decisions and actions.

Suggested Citation

  • Rose N Oronje & Carol Mukiira & Elizabeth Kahurani & Violet Murunga, 2022. "Training and mentorship as a tool for building African researchers’ capacity in knowledge translation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-19, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0266106
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0266106
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0266106&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0266106?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ruth Stewart & Laurenz Langer & Yvonne Erasmus, 2019. "An integrated model for increasing the use of evidence by decision-makers for improved development," Development Southern Africa, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(5), pages 616-631, September.
    2. Kirsty Newman & Catherine Fisher & Louise Shaxson, 2012. "Stimulating Demand for Research Evidence: What Role for Capacity‐building?," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(5), pages 17-24, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Samantha Shewchuk & James Wallace & Mia Seibold, 2023. "Evaluations of training programs to improve capacity in K*: a systematic scoping review of methods applied and outcomes assessed," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Temilade Sesan & Willie Siyanbola, 2021. "“These are the realities”: insights from facilitating researcher-policymaker engagement in Nigeria’s household energy sector," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    2. Roger W. Harris, 2016. "How ICT4D Research Fails the Poor," Information Technology for Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 177-192, January.
    3. Grimm, Sven & Gensch, Mareike Magdalena & Hauf, Johanna & Prenzel, Julia & Rehani, Nitja & Senz, Sarah & Vogel, Olivier, 2018. "The interface between research and policy-making in South Africa: exploring the institutional framework and practice of an uneasy relationship," IDOS Discussion Papers 19/2018, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    4. Neal Hockley, 2014. "Cost–Benefit Analysis: A Decision-Support Tool or a Venue for Contesting Ecosystem Knowledge?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(2), pages 283-300, April.
    5. Toro Andrew Jacob & Omondi Richard Mc’Otieno & Anne Omondi Kerubo, 2020. "The Impact of Industrial Unrest on Selected Performance Outcomes of Health Institutions: A Case of Kiambu County, Kenya," International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI), vol. 7(11), pages 177-188, November.
    6. Natasa Loncarevic & Pernille Tanggaard Andersen & Anja Leppin & Maja Bertram, 2021. "Policymakers’ Research Capacities, Engagement, and Use of Research in Public Health Policymaking," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-17, October.
    7. Weresa, Marzenna Anna & Karbowski, Adam & Kowalski, Arkadiusz & Lachowicz, Marek & Lewandowska, Małgorzata & Mackiewicz, Marta & Napiórkowski, Tomasz & Rószkiewicz, Małgorzata, 2018. "Strengthening the knowledge base for innovation in the European Union," EconStor Books, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 182399 edited by Weresa, Marzenna Anna.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0266106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.