The case for global health reciprocal innovation

[...]some of the examples presented of reciprocal innovation evolved organically and serendipitously during the process of researching and implementing LMIC evidence-based interventions and were transferred to a different setting, resulting in novel and effective approaches to meet the needs of the new location.3–5 The information and examples provided in the Supplement will hopefully inform researchers and funders of the opportunity to more systematically encourage and harness a GHRI approach to research. Because GHRI is an emerging concept in global health research, there are few programmes and publications that describe or incorporate the approach. In line with these goals, the Supplement paper by Ruhl et al describes challenges and lessons learnt from one of the few existing GHRI grant programmes and includes examples such as the exchange of innovations for caregivers of children with autism and preterm babies and infants exposed to opioids as well as a new device to test for faulty drugs.6 Another Supplement paper by Turan et al documents cases in which mental health and well-being interventions originating in or conceived for LMICs were implemented in the USA, including delivery of psychological interventions by non-specialists, HIV-related stigma reduction programmes, substance use mitigation strategies and interventions to promote parenting skills and family functioning.7 Notably, the field of mental health has been proactive and innovative by encouraging reciprocal learning through some of its research programmes, including, for example NIH RFA-MH22-130 and NIH RFA-MH-22–100. Patel-Larson et al describe in the Supplement a platform for innovation exchange between domestic and global health US HIV/AIDS programmes.8 Other Supplement papers describe barriers and facilitators for implementing a GHRI approach, which highlight the complexities inherent in exchanging health innovations between different sociocultural and structural contexts.4–7 Some papers include lessons learnt to guide the future use of a GHRI approach.4 6 7 Rid et al explore ethical, legal and regulatory considerations involved in implementing GHRI, including GHRI’s ethical commitment to equitable research partnerships as well as a concern that GHRI studies could displace funding for studies whose results have more immediate or significant benefits for populations in LMICs.9 Dearing et al introduce the idea of reciprocal coproduction as a basis for the diffusion of global health innov