Current status and perceived challenges of collaborative research in a leading pharmacy college in Iraq: a qualitative study | BMC Medical Education

0
Current status and perceived challenges of collaborative research in a leading pharmacy college in Iraq: a qualitative study | BMC Medical Education

To reach the saturation point, 24 academic pharmacists who had collaborative research experience were interviewed in this qualitative study. Most participants [N = 15] were females. The majority received a Ph.D. degree in pharmaceutical sciences [N = 17] from the University of Baghdad [N = 12] with at least 10 years of academic experience and published more than ten articles [N = 20]. Further details are provided in Tables 1 and 2. The generated study themes and subthemes are shown in Fig. 1; Table 3.

Table 1 Demographics of participating academics
Table 2 Characteristics of study participants
Fig. 1
figure 1

Study themes and subthemes

Table 3 The study themes and subthemes

Theme 1: levels of collaborative research

Study participants had reported collaborating with a wide range of academic pharmacists and researchers. Therefore, the level at which the collaborative research was conducted was emerged as the first theme for this study. This theme aimed to show the degree of collaboration between the participating academic pharmacists and other researchers. Three subthemes emerged from this theme, including interdisciplinary research collaboration (i.e., research collaboration with academic pharmacists at other disciplines in the same college), at the national level (i.e., research collaboration with Iraqi researchers working in other academic and non-academic institutions), and at the international level (i.e., research collaboration with non-Iraqi researchers).

Nineteen [79.2%] of the interviewed participants reported conducting interdisciplinary research collaboration. Four participants reported conducting more than one collaborative research. Meanwhile, the outcome of these collaborations was positive for 17 participants [89.5%] and ended with either research publication [n = 14; 25 publications] or fulfillment of the graduation requirement for a postgraduate student [n = 3]. The interdisciplinary collaborations were with researchers working in clinical laboratory science discipline [n = 9], pharmacology and toxicology discipline [n = 5], pharmaceutics discipline [n = 2], clinical pharmacy discipline [n = 2], pharmaceutical chemistry discipline [n = 2], and pharmacognosy discipline [n = 1].

“I collaborated with a friend who works in the pharmacology discipline” P 17.

“I collaborated with a doctor from the Clinical Laboratory Science discipline to conduct research; he helped in doing the statistical analysis of the collected data. It was a nice experience ” P 10.

Meanwhile, 18 [75%] of the interviewed academics reported conducting collaborative research at the national level. Seven participants reported participating in more than one research collaboration. All of these collaborations were positive and ended with either publication of research [n = 16; 62 publications] or fulfillment of the graduation requirement for a postgraduate student [n = 2]. At the national level, the most common institutions that participating academics reported collaboration with their researchers include: public universities [n = 8], scientific centers of the Ministry of Industry and Minerals [n = 3], hospitals [n = 2], specialized health centers [n = 3], labs at the Ministry of Science and Technology [n = 1], and the National Center for Drugs Control and Drug Researches [n = 1].

“I collaborated with a physician to conduct research in a hospital who assisted in patients’ enrollment. I think that the presence of a physician on a clinical research team is essential.” P 10.

“I collaborated with researchers working at Science College/Al-Mustansyriah University to do proton nuclear magnetic resonance (H-NMR) testing” P 7.

On the other hand, 10 of the interviewed academic pharmacists [41.7%] reported conducting collaborative research with academics in international universities to assist them with laboratory testing, support scientific writing, and/or aid in data collection. Meanwhile, six of these participants [60%] had already got their academic degrees from international universities. Four of the participants reported conducting more than one collaboration with international researchers. All of these collaborations were positive and ended with either research publication [n = 9; 18 publications] or participation in an international conference [n = 1].

“I collaborated with academics working at Al-Batraa University; they helped me in collecting data from Jordanian participants” P 5.

“During my postgraduate study, I collaborated with researchers at Sheffield University to conduct research in their laboratories” P11.

Theme 2: facilitators of collaborative research

While study participants discussed their collaborative research, they signaled many factors that encouraged them to do these collaborations. Therefore, “facilitators of collaborative research” was chosen as a major study theme. Two subthemes emerged from this theme, including reasons behind research collaboration and researcher characteristics that influence collaboration in research.

Regarding the reasons behind interdisciplinary research collaboration, ten participants reported that they collaborated with researchers in other disciplines to get their help in preclinical testing of the efficacy and/or safety of a developed product. Other reported reasons included getting help in the academic writing of the manuscript [n = 4], supervising postgraduate students [n = 3], and facilitating the use of instruments in the laboratory of the researcher discipline [n = 2].

“I collaborated with a researcher working in the Clinical Laboratory Science discipline to test the antibacterial activity of my newly synthesized chemical moiety” P1.

“I collaborated with a researcher in clinical pharmacy to help me in writing a review article” P 7.

The main reported reasons for national research collaborations were technical support [getting help in using and operating instruments available in the institution of the second researcher [n = 8]], scientific reasons [facilitating recruitment/or diagnosis of study participants [n = 5]], academic reasons [aid in writing a manuscript [n = 2] and supervising postgraduate students [n = 2]], and financial issues [sharing the cost of testing kits [n = 1]].

“Because we cannot test our products by HPLC and LC-Mass, so I collaborated with researchers working in the Ibn-Albitar Center [A center operated by the Ministry of Industry and Minerals] to get their help in testing our product” P 17.

“The physician assisted in the diagnosis and recruitment of patients to the study. Indeed, Iraqi patients usually respond better to physician orders; therefore, without a physician I cannot collect my study sample” P 10.

“Because some instruments aren’t available in our college, so I collaborated with a researcher working in the Ministry of Science and Technology, which helped us analyze our developed formulations” P 16.

At the international level, the main reported reasons for research collaborations include supervising Iraqi postgraduate students [n = 4], collecting data at the international level [n = 2], writing a part of a review study [n = 2], and testing a product by instruments available in the institution of the second researcher [n = 2].

“During my master’s study at Toledo University, I did research in collaboration with a famous researcher [my supervisor] who had published more than 50 articles” P24.

“I collaborated with researchers at the Islamic University of Iran. They helped me in testing anticancer activity using cell line” P7.

Regarding the characteristics that encourage academics to collaborate with a researcher, the reported characteristics that encourage academic pharmacists to collaborate with other researchers in the college of pharmacy include the researcher’s scientific experience [n = 11], research skills and performance [High H-index, good publication history, experience in academic writing and statistical analysis] [n = 7], and personality [honest, cooperative, and hard worker] [n = 5].

“A good researcher to collaborate with must have good experience in his field of practice” P2.

“The best researcher to collaborate with must be a hard worker, cooperative, and have good scientific and writing skills” P14.

“I usually prefer to cooperate with researchers with good experience in their field of practice and have a high H-index” P24.

At the national level, the reported characteristics that encourage academic pharmacists to collaborate with a researcher include the researcher’s personality [honest, cooperative, leadership, and motivated] [n = 11], scientific skills and experience [n = 9], research skills [experience in academic writing and statistical analysis] [n = 2] and academic degree [n = 2].

“The researcher must have good experience in using instruments, honest in reporting data, and cooperative” P16.

“Having basic research skills and being honest in reporting results” P 22.

At the international level, the reported characteristics that encourage academic pharmacists to collaborate with a researcher include the researcher’s academic performance [High H-index, having a high academic degree, and working in high-ranked university [n = 6]], research skills [publication experience besides experience in academic writing and statistical analysis [n = 5]], scientific experience [n = 4], and personality [honest and cooperative] [n = 2].

“I think a good international researcher is the one that has a high academic degree, many publications, and experience in academic writing” P5.

“If the international researcher is working in a high-ranked university this will benefit us during research publication” P13.

Theme 3: barriers for collaborative research

This theme provides insight into the multifaceted barriers that hinder effective research collaboration across varying levels. Many reported barriers, such as time constraints, resource limitations, and regulatory challenges were universal at all collaboration levels.

At the college level, four participants [21.1%] did not report any barrier, while 15 participants [78.9%] reported multiple barriers to such collaboration. The reported barriers include limited time for academics due to work overload [n = 7], limited resources [instruments and facilities] in college disciplines [n = 7], lack of cooperative researchers [n = 2], the limited research ideas that can be applied by researchers of multiple disciplines [n = 2], and the difficulties in university regulations [n = 2].

“Limited time for academics due to work overload and limited instruments in college labs are the main barriers to research collaboration” P2.

“Only the first 3 authors in any research will benefit from it in academic promotion. In addition, university regulations prevent researchers in different discipline to collaborate because for example when a researcher from a pharmaceutics discipline cooperates with a researcher in clinical pharmacy to conduct clinical-research, this research will not be counted during academic promotion for the academics in pharmaceutics discipline” P14.

Regarding the barriers to collaboration at the national level, five participants [27.8%] did not report any barrier, while 13 participants [72.2%] reported multiple barriers to such collaboration. These barriers include limited time for academics due to work overload [n = 7], the complicated University administrative laws for registration and obtaining an agreement to conduct research [n = 5], limited relationships and difficulties in contacting researchers who work outside pharmacy college [n = 5], limited resources in national institutions [n = 3], limited funds for research [n = 3], lack of research ideas that can be applied with researchers from different institutions [n = 1], and lack of research motivation [n = 1].

“Limited ideas and funds for research, besides limited instruments [e.g., for conducting a genetic test] affect on research collaboration” P10.

“Difficulty in contacting researchers outside our college and our limited time due to academic activities in preparing lectures and correcting exam papers” P20.

Regarding the barriers to collaboration at the international level, one participant did not report any barrier, while other participants reported multiple barriers to such collaboration; these barriers include difficulties in contacting researchers who work outside the college [n = 8], a low H-index for the Iraqi researcher [n = 5], limited funds for research [n = 3], the complicated university administrative laws for the registration of such type of research and in obtaining a “facilitation mission letter” [n = 2], limited time for academics to conduct research due to work overload [n = 2], and the limited research ideas suitable for international research collaboration [n = 1].

“International researchers did not welcome the collaboration with researchers that do not publish any research and also researchers with low H-index” P6.

“Regulation difficulties in registration of the research and in obtaining a “facilitation mission letter”, along with the limited academic time for conducting a research” P7.

Theme 4: ethical challenges in collaborative research

During an interview with study participants, the issue of real contribution from study authors was raised by most participants; therefore, ethical challenge in collaborative research was written as one of the study’s major themes. Subthemes that emerged from this theme were also grouped according to the level of research collaboration, whether at college, national, or international level.

Regarding the contribution of authors in collaborative research at the college level, 10 participants [52.6%] perceived that there is a possibility for adding some authors to such research without significant contribution. The main reported reason for this unethical authorship is to increase the number of publications for researchers.

“In review articles, some authors do not make significant contributions. However, this issue (limited contribution) is relatively uncommon and often arises from the desire to increase publication output among researchers.“P7.

“Many researches are conducted without real contribution from some authors. Such authors just pay the money for publication because they are in need of publications in their academic promotion” P16.

Regarding authors’ contribution to collaborative research at the national level, 12 [66.7%] participants perceived that there is a possibility for adding some authors to such research without significant contribution to the research. The reason for this unethical behavior is the obligation of the national institutions to add one of their researchers as a supervisor for the research to facilitate the academic work in the institution.

“For research conducted with researchers from outside the college, many authors from the institution where the research is conducted are added to the author’s list despite having minimal or no contribution to the study. Their inclusion is mainly because their institution supplied the primary researcher with the necessary instruments and facilities for the study.“P11.

“The possibility for adding an author from national institutions to the research without major contribution occurs at a moderate level” P21.

Regarding authors’ contribution to collaborative research at the international level, three participants [30%] perceived that there is a possibility for adding some authors to such research without their significant contribution to the research. The main reason for this unethical behavior is to increase the chance of manuscript acceptance in high-ranked journals.

“Most of the international researchers that I worked with have research ethics. They do not accept to add their names as authors without real contributions to the research” P14.

“Because a famous researcher’s name is important in increasing the chance of publishing our work, we sometimes add the name of international researchers with their affiliation even if they have minimal contribution to the research” P23.

Theme 5: recommendations to improve research collaboration

Participating academic pharmacists gave many recommendations to enhance and improve future research collaboration; these recommendations were grouped into a major study theme.

The subthemes that emerged from this theme were recommendations to improve research collaboration at the college, national, and the international level.

Eighteen [94.7%] of participants provided recommendations to improve research collaboration at the college level. However, only two of them reported more than one recommendation. The reported recommendations were related to scientific [n = 9], technical [n = 8], financial [n = 3], and/or regulatory [n = 2] issues. The scientific recommendations include conducting seminars and/or workshops by researchers with experience in collaborative research to motivate other researchers for collaboration [n = 8] and searching the recommendations in postgraduate students’ theses to get research ideas [n = 1]. Technical recommendations include providing college laboratories with new instruments and facilities [n = 8]. The regulatory recommendations include simplifying university and college regulations for researchers willing to do collaborative research [n = 2]. Financial recommendations include providing funds and incentives for researchers who do collaborative research [n = 2].

“To extract a herb and modify it chemically we must cooperate with pharmacognosy researchers and to improve such collaboration we need to supply our college labs with certain instruments for example HPLC and rotary-evaporator” P15.

“I recommend providing funds and incentives to all researchers who conduct multidisciplinary research. At the current time the University just provides appreciation-letter to researchers who publish their work in indexed journals. Additionally, I recommend providing researchers with all required instruments” P11.

I recommend conducting workshops and seminars to present the results of collaborated research” P12.

At the national level, 15 [83.3%] participants provided recommendations to improve research collaboration. However, only two of them reported more than one recommendation. The reported recommendations were related to scientific [n = 9], regulatory [n = 7], and financial [n = 2] issues. The scientific recommendations include conducting seminars and/or workshops by researchers with experience in collaborative research to motivate other researchers to collaborate [n = 4]; participation in national conferences [n = 1]; cooperation with the Ministry of Health and pharmaceutical companies to know and solve their pharmaceutical problems [n = 2]; requesting at least one research/year from academics [n = 1]; and encouraging academics to be members in the examination-committees of postgraduate students in other Universities [n = 1]. Meanwhile, the regulatory recommendations include modifying and/or simplifying the current university regulations for researchers willing to do collaborative research [n = 5] and simplifying the non-academic institutions’ administrative laws required from researchers conducting research in these institutions [n = 2]. Finally, the financial recommendations were mainly related to providing researchers with a fund for conducting their research [n = 2].

“Simplifying regulations required for conducting research in non-academic institutions. In addition, the Government must supply the required instruments for scientific research” P6.

“Conducting workshops about research collaboration and encouraging our researchers to attend conferences that are held by other universities” P17.

At the international level, eight [80%] of the interviewed academic pharmacists provided recommendations to improve research collaboration. Three of the participants provided more than one recommendation. The reported recommendations were related to regulatory [n = 6], scientific [n = 4], and financial [n = 1] issues. The scientific recommendations include encouraging researchers to join international workshops and conferences [n = 3] and publish many articles in high-reputation journals [n = 1]. The regulatory recommendations include inviting international speakers for national conferences [n = 3]; simplifying the required steps for registering international research [n = 2]; and conducting official collaborations between Iraqi universities and international ones [n = 1]. The last participants recommended financial help from the university by activating research scholarship [n = 1].

“Simplifying the needed steps for inviting international speakers for national conferences and encouraging our researchers to participate in international conferences are very important steps to enhance international research collaboration” P5.

“The researcher must publish in international journals, besides providing researchers with research scholarships” P6.

link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *