Graduate Student Research and Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

https://opus.uleth.ca/handle/10133/5318

Browse

Browsing Graduate Student Research and Publications by Subject "Ageing research"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Building consensus on priority areas for Sub-Saharan Africa’s ageing population research: an e-Delphi study protocol
    (Public Library of Science, 2024) Okoh, Augustine C.; Onyeso, Ogochukwu K.; Ekemezie, Wendy; Oyinlola, Oluwagbemiga; Akinrolie, Olayinka; Kalu, Michael
    Background Improvement in medico-social services has increased life expectancy and population ageing in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). It was estimated that about 163 million people aged 65 and older will be resident in SSA by 2050. There is inadequate ageing research capacity in SSA which necessitates this study to (a) identify a decade-long ageing research opportunities, challenges, and solutions, and (b) prioritize critical ageing research areas and methodologies relevant to the SSA. Methods We designed an e-Delphi protocol following the Reporting Guideline for Priority Setting of Health Research with Stakeholder. The stakeholders will be researchers, practitioners, older adults, and caregivers purposively selected through snowballing quota sampling to complete three rounds of e-Delphi surveys. Round 1 will involve open-ended questions derived from the study objectives. Responses from round 1 will be prepared as a checklist for stakeholders to rate during rounds 2 & 3, using a 9-point scale: low priority (1–3), moderate priority (4–6), and high priority (7–9). The criterion for reaching a consensus will be ≥ 70% of stakeholders rating an item “high priority” and ≤ 15% as “low priority.” Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test will be used to assess the stability of stakeholders’ responses, and qualitative comments will be analysed using content analysis. Discussion and implications Setting aging research/practice priorities will help maximize the benefits of research investment and provide valuable direction for allocating public and private research funds to areas of strategic importance.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Methodology and reporting quality of 544 studies related to ageing: a continued discussion in setting priorities for ageing research in Africa
    (Gen-info Ltd., 2022) Kalu, Michael E.; Okeke, Chukwuebuka; Nwachukwu, Ernest; Okoh, Augustine; Akinrolie, Olayinka; Ezulike, Chigozie D.; Adandom, Henrietha; Onyeso, Ogochukwu K.; Egbumike, Joesph; Olatunji, Funmibi D.; Ugwuodo, Ebere P.; Ojembe, Blessing U.; Adandom, Israel I.; Anagbaso, Akaolisa J.; Akinrolie, Omobolade M.; Anieto, Ebuka M.; Ekoh, Prince C.; Makanjuola, John O.; Ibekaku, Michael C.; Iwuagwu, Anthony O.; Onyekere, Chukwuebuka P.; Muomaife, Kelechi J.; Nkoroh, Chinonyerem; Odega, Adaobi; Ogbueche, Chukwudi M.; Omeje, Chidimma; Onyekwuluje, Chisom I.; Oyinlola, Oluwagbemiga; Rayner, Daniel; Ugwuja, Immaculata A.
    Background: The quality assessment provides information on the overall strength of evidence and methodological quality of a research design, highlighting the level of confidence the reader should place on the findings for decision making. This paper aimed to assess the quality (methodology and quality of reporting) of ageing studies in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Method: This paper is the second of a Four-Part Series paper of a previous systematic mapping review of peer-reviewed literature on ageing studies conducted in SSA. We updated the literature search to include additional 32 articles, a total of 544 articles included in this paper. Downs & Black checklist, Case Report guidelines checklist, the 45-items Lundgren et al. checklist, and the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool were used to assess the methodological quality of quantitative, case reports, qualitative, and mixed-method studies. Quality assessment was piloted and conducted in pairs for each study type. Depending on the checklist, each study was classified as excellent, good, fair, or poor. Result: Of the 544 articles, we performed the quality assessment of a total of 451 quantitative studies [Randomized control trials (RCTs) and pre-post (n=15), longitudinal (n=122), case-control (n=15) and cross-sectional (n=300); 4 case reports, 74 qualitative and 15 mixed-method studies. Only 20.4% (n=111) articles were of high quality [one RCT, 27 longitudinal, 4 case-control, 48 cross-sectional studies, 19 qualitative, and 12 mixed-method studies]. The remaining 433 were rated as moderate quality (n=292, 53.7%), fair quality (n = 96, 17.7%) and poor quality (n = 45, 8.2%). Most (80%) quantitative articles’ sample size is small, resulting in insufficient power to detect a clinically or significant important effect. Three-quarter (75%) of the qualitative studies did not report their research team characteristics and a reflexivity component of the 45-items Lundgren et al. checklist. Mixed-method studies with low quality did not report the qualitative studies properly. Conclusion: We conclude that the methodological and quality reporting of published studies on ageing in SSA show variable quality, albeit primarily moderate quality, against high quality. Studies with a large sample size are recommended, and qualitative researchers should provide a section on research team members’ characteristics and reflexivity in their paper or as an appendix.