Criteria to assess potential reverse innovations: opportunities for shared learning between high- and low-income countries
Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are developing novel approaches to healthcare that may be relevant to high-income countries (HICs). These include products, services, organizational processes, or policies that improve access, cost, or efficiency of healthcare. However, given the challenge of...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Globalization and health 2017-01, Vol.13 (1), p.4-4, Article 4 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 4 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 4 |
container_title | Globalization and health |
container_volume | 13 |
creator | Bhattacharyya, Onil Wu, Diane Mossman, Kathryn Hayden, Leigh Gill, Pavan Cheng, Yu-Ling Daar, Abdallah Soman, Dilip Synowiec, Christina Taylor, Andrea Wong, Joseph von Zedtwitz, Max Zlotkin, Stanley Mitchell, William McGahan, Anita |
description | Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are developing novel approaches to healthcare that may be relevant to high-income countries (HICs). These include products, services, organizational processes, or policies that improve access, cost, or efficiency of healthcare. However, given the challenge of replication, it is difficult to identify innovations that could be successfully adapted to high-income settings. We present a set of criteria for evaluating the potential impact of LMIC innovations in HIC settings.
An initial framework was drafted based on a literature review, and revised iteratively by applying it to LMIC examples from the Center for Health Market Innovations (CHMI) program database. The resulting criteria were then reviewed using a modified Delphi process by the Reverse Innovation Working Group, consisting of 31 experts in medicine, engineering, management and political science, as well as representatives from industry and government, all with an expressed interest in reverse innovation.
The resulting 8 criteria are divided into two steps with a simple scoring system. First, innovations are assessed according to their success within the LMIC context according to metrics of improving accessibility, cost-effectiveness, scalability, and overall effectiveness. Next, they are scored for their potential for spread to HICs, according to their ability to address an HIC healthcare challenge, compatibility with infrastructure and regulatory requirements, degree of novelty, and degree of current collaboration with HICs. We use examples to illustrate where programs which appear initially promising may be unlikely to succeed in a HIC setting due to feasibility concerns.
This study presents a framework for identifying reverse innovations that may be useful to policymakers and funding agencies interested in identifying novel approaches to addressing cost and access to care in HICs. We solicited expert feedback and consensus on an empirically-derived set of criteria to create a practical tool for funders that can be used directly and tested prospectively using current databases of LMIC programs. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1186/s12992-016-0225-1 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5264440</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A480609065</galeid><sourcerecordid>A480609065</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c489t-8c7d2110c97b97744423a993de77b5a016bea7b3309fd6a94e880c12f4b39be93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkk1v1DAQhiMEoqXwA7ggS1zgEPBXEptDpWrFR0UlOMDZcpxJ1lXWXjzOFvj1eLWldDnZ0jzzjt6Zt6qeM_qGMdW-Rca15jVlbU05b2r2oDplnZS1aql4eO9_Uj1BvKZUUin04-qEK8Z5y8Vp9XuVfIbkLcmRWERAJNuYIWRvZ5JgBwmB-BDizmYfA74jcbuNKS_BZw9IxpgIrm2CgcxgU_BhIj3kG4BA1n5a18SGUoo3tQ8uboC4uIScSuvT6tFoZ4Rnt-9Z9f3D-2-rT_XVl4-Xq4ur2kmlc61cN3DGqNNdr7viSHJhtRYDdF3f2GK-B9v1QlA9Dq3VEpSijvFR9kL3oMVZdX7Q3S79BgZXvCU7m23yG5t-mWi9Oa4EvzZT3JmGt2UaLQKvbgVS_LEAZrPx6GCebYC4oCmn4Fw1ouEFffkfeh2XFIq9PSV1q7jq_lGTncH4MMYy1-1FzYVUtKWatk2hXh9RLoYMP_NkF0Tz-evlMcsOrEsRMcF4Z49Rs8-KOWTFlHWZfVYMKz0v7u_lruNvOMQfhj260Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1864968287</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Criteria to assess potential reverse innovations: opportunities for shared learning between high- and low-income countries</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</source><creator>Bhattacharyya, Onil ; Wu, Diane ; Mossman, Kathryn ; Hayden, Leigh ; Gill, Pavan ; Cheng, Yu-Ling ; Daar, Abdallah ; Soman, Dilip ; Synowiec, Christina ; Taylor, Andrea ; Wong, Joseph ; von Zedtwitz, Max ; Zlotkin, Stanley ; Mitchell, William ; McGahan, Anita</creator><creatorcontrib>Bhattacharyya, Onil ; Wu, Diane ; Mossman, Kathryn ; Hayden, Leigh ; Gill, Pavan ; Cheng, Yu-Ling ; Daar, Abdallah ; Soman, Dilip ; Synowiec, Christina ; Taylor, Andrea ; Wong, Joseph ; von Zedtwitz, Max ; Zlotkin, Stanley ; Mitchell, William ; McGahan, Anita</creatorcontrib><description>Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are developing novel approaches to healthcare that may be relevant to high-income countries (HICs). These include products, services, organizational processes, or policies that improve access, cost, or efficiency of healthcare. However, given the challenge of replication, it is difficult to identify innovations that could be successfully adapted to high-income settings. We present a set of criteria for evaluating the potential impact of LMIC innovations in HIC settings.
An initial framework was drafted based on a literature review, and revised iteratively by applying it to LMIC examples from the Center for Health Market Innovations (CHMI) program database. The resulting criteria were then reviewed using a modified Delphi process by the Reverse Innovation Working Group, consisting of 31 experts in medicine, engineering, management and political science, as well as representatives from industry and government, all with an expressed interest in reverse innovation.
The resulting 8 criteria are divided into two steps with a simple scoring system. First, innovations are assessed according to their success within the LMIC context according to metrics of improving accessibility, cost-effectiveness, scalability, and overall effectiveness. Next, they are scored for their potential for spread to HICs, according to their ability to address an HIC healthcare challenge, compatibility with infrastructure and regulatory requirements, degree of novelty, and degree of current collaboration with HICs. We use examples to illustrate where programs which appear initially promising may be unlikely to succeed in a HIC setting due to feasibility concerns.
This study presents a framework for identifying reverse innovations that may be useful to policymakers and funding agencies interested in identifying novel approaches to addressing cost and access to care in HICs. We solicited expert feedback and consensus on an empirically-derived set of criteria to create a practical tool for funders that can be used directly and tested prospectively using current databases of LMIC programs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1744-8603</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1744-8603</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/s12992-016-0225-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28122623</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BioMed Central Ltd</publisher><subject>Adaptation ; Cooperative Behavior ; Costs ; Delivery of Health Care - classification ; Delivery of Health Care - economics ; Delivery of Health Care - methods ; Delphi method ; Developed Countries ; Developing Countries ; Diffusion of Innovation ; Funding ; GNI ; Gross National Income ; Health promotion ; Health Services Accessibility - classification ; Health Services Accessibility - standards ; Humans ; Innovations ; International aspects ; Internationality ; Learning ; Literature reviews ; Low income groups ; Medical innovations ; Methodology ; Product development ; Qualitative Research ; Working groups</subject><ispartof>Globalization and health, 2017-01, Vol.13 (1), p.4-4, Article 4</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2017 BioMed Central Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright BioMed Central 2017</rights><rights>The Author(s). 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c489t-8c7d2110c97b97744423a993de77b5a016bea7b3309fd6a94e880c12f4b39be93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c489t-8c7d2110c97b97744423a993de77b5a016bea7b3309fd6a94e880c12f4b39be93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5264440/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5264440/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28122623$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bhattacharyya, Onil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wu, Diane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mossman, Kathryn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayden, Leigh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gill, Pavan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, Yu-Ling</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daar, Abdallah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soman, Dilip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Synowiec, Christina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taylor, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, Joseph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>von Zedtwitz, Max</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zlotkin, Stanley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, William</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGahan, Anita</creatorcontrib><title>Criteria to assess potential reverse innovations: opportunities for shared learning between high- and low-income countries</title><title>Globalization and health</title><addtitle>Global Health</addtitle><description>Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are developing novel approaches to healthcare that may be relevant to high-income countries (HICs). These include products, services, organizational processes, or policies that improve access, cost, or efficiency of healthcare. However, given the challenge of replication, it is difficult to identify innovations that could be successfully adapted to high-income settings. We present a set of criteria for evaluating the potential impact of LMIC innovations in HIC settings.
An initial framework was drafted based on a literature review, and revised iteratively by applying it to LMIC examples from the Center for Health Market Innovations (CHMI) program database. The resulting criteria were then reviewed using a modified Delphi process by the Reverse Innovation Working Group, consisting of 31 experts in medicine, engineering, management and political science, as well as representatives from industry and government, all with an expressed interest in reverse innovation.
The resulting 8 criteria are divided into two steps with a simple scoring system. First, innovations are assessed according to their success within the LMIC context according to metrics of improving accessibility, cost-effectiveness, scalability, and overall effectiveness. Next, they are scored for their potential for spread to HICs, according to their ability to address an HIC healthcare challenge, compatibility with infrastructure and regulatory requirements, degree of novelty, and degree of current collaboration with HICs. We use examples to illustrate where programs which appear initially promising may be unlikely to succeed in a HIC setting due to feasibility concerns.
This study presents a framework for identifying reverse innovations that may be useful to policymakers and funding agencies interested in identifying novel approaches to addressing cost and access to care in HICs. We solicited expert feedback and consensus on an empirically-derived set of criteria to create a practical tool for funders that can be used directly and tested prospectively using current databases of LMIC programs.</description><subject>Adaptation</subject><subject>Cooperative Behavior</subject><subject>Costs</subject><subject>Delivery of Health Care - classification</subject><subject>Delivery of Health Care - economics</subject><subject>Delivery of Health Care - methods</subject><subject>Delphi method</subject><subject>Developed Countries</subject><subject>Developing Countries</subject><subject>Diffusion of Innovation</subject><subject>Funding</subject><subject>GNI</subject><subject>Gross National Income</subject><subject>Health promotion</subject><subject>Health Services Accessibility - classification</subject><subject>Health Services Accessibility - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Innovations</subject><subject>International aspects</subject><subject>Internationality</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Low income groups</subject><subject>Medical innovations</subject><subject>Methodology</subject><subject>Product development</subject><subject>Qualitative Research</subject><subject>Working groups</subject><issn>1744-8603</issn><issn>1744-8603</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>KPI</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkk1v1DAQhiMEoqXwA7ggS1zgEPBXEptDpWrFR0UlOMDZcpxJ1lXWXjzOFvj1eLWldDnZ0jzzjt6Zt6qeM_qGMdW-Rca15jVlbU05b2r2oDplnZS1aql4eO9_Uj1BvKZUUin04-qEK8Z5y8Vp9XuVfIbkLcmRWERAJNuYIWRvZ5JgBwmB-BDizmYfA74jcbuNKS_BZw9IxpgIrm2CgcxgU_BhIj3kG4BA1n5a18SGUoo3tQ8uboC4uIScSuvT6tFoZ4Rnt-9Z9f3D-2-rT_XVl4-Xq4ur2kmlc61cN3DGqNNdr7viSHJhtRYDdF3f2GK-B9v1QlA9Dq3VEpSijvFR9kL3oMVZdX7Q3S79BgZXvCU7m23yG5t-mWi9Oa4EvzZT3JmGt2UaLQKvbgVS_LEAZrPx6GCebYC4oCmn4Fw1ouEFffkfeh2XFIq9PSV1q7jq_lGTncH4MMYy1-1FzYVUtKWatk2hXh9RLoYMP_NkF0Tz-evlMcsOrEsRMcF4Z49Rs8-KOWTFlHWZfVYMKz0v7u_lruNvOMQfhj260Q</recordid><startdate>20170125</startdate><enddate>20170125</enddate><creator>Bhattacharyya, Onil</creator><creator>Wu, Diane</creator><creator>Mossman, Kathryn</creator><creator>Hayden, Leigh</creator><creator>Gill, Pavan</creator><creator>Cheng, Yu-Ling</creator><creator>Daar, Abdallah</creator><creator>Soman, Dilip</creator><creator>Synowiec, Christina</creator><creator>Taylor, Andrea</creator><creator>Wong, Joseph</creator><creator>von Zedtwitz, Max</creator><creator>Zlotkin, Stanley</creator><creator>Mitchell, William</creator><creator>McGahan, Anita</creator><general>BioMed Central Ltd</general><general>BioMed Central</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>KPI</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170125</creationdate><title>Criteria to assess potential reverse innovations: opportunities for shared learning between high- and low-income countries</title><author>Bhattacharyya, Onil ; Wu, Diane ; Mossman, Kathryn ; Hayden, Leigh ; Gill, Pavan ; Cheng, Yu-Ling ; Daar, Abdallah ; Soman, Dilip ; Synowiec, Christina ; Taylor, Andrea ; Wong, Joseph ; von Zedtwitz, Max ; Zlotkin, Stanley ; Mitchell, William ; McGahan, Anita</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c489t-8c7d2110c97b97744423a993de77b5a016bea7b3309fd6a94e880c12f4b39be93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adaptation</topic><topic>Cooperative Behavior</topic><topic>Costs</topic><topic>Delivery of Health Care - classification</topic><topic>Delivery of Health Care - economics</topic><topic>Delivery of Health Care - methods</topic><topic>Delphi method</topic><topic>Developed Countries</topic><topic>Developing Countries</topic><topic>Diffusion of Innovation</topic><topic>Funding</topic><topic>GNI</topic><topic>Gross National Income</topic><topic>Health promotion</topic><topic>Health Services Accessibility - classification</topic><topic>Health Services Accessibility - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Innovations</topic><topic>International aspects</topic><topic>Internationality</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Low income groups</topic><topic>Medical innovations</topic><topic>Methodology</topic><topic>Product development</topic><topic>Qualitative Research</topic><topic>Working groups</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bhattacharyya, Onil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wu, Diane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mossman, Kathryn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayden, Leigh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gill, Pavan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, Yu-Ling</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daar, Abdallah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soman, Dilip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Synowiec, Christina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taylor, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, Joseph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>von Zedtwitz, Max</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zlotkin, Stanley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, William</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGahan, Anita</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Global Issues</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health & Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Globalization and health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bhattacharyya, Onil</au><au>Wu, Diane</au><au>Mossman, Kathryn</au><au>Hayden, Leigh</au><au>Gill, Pavan</au><au>Cheng, Yu-Ling</au><au>Daar, Abdallah</au><au>Soman, Dilip</au><au>Synowiec, Christina</au><au>Taylor, Andrea</au><au>Wong, Joseph</au><au>von Zedtwitz, Max</au><au>Zlotkin, Stanley</au><au>Mitchell, William</au><au>McGahan, Anita</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Criteria to assess potential reverse innovations: opportunities for shared learning between high- and low-income countries</atitle><jtitle>Globalization and health</jtitle><addtitle>Global Health</addtitle><date>2017-01-25</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>4</spage><epage>4</epage><pages>4-4</pages><artnum>4</artnum><issn>1744-8603</issn><eissn>1744-8603</eissn><abstract>Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are developing novel approaches to healthcare that may be relevant to high-income countries (HICs). These include products, services, organizational processes, or policies that improve access, cost, or efficiency of healthcare. However, given the challenge of replication, it is difficult to identify innovations that could be successfully adapted to high-income settings. We present a set of criteria for evaluating the potential impact of LMIC innovations in HIC settings.
An initial framework was drafted based on a literature review, and revised iteratively by applying it to LMIC examples from the Center for Health Market Innovations (CHMI) program database. The resulting criteria were then reviewed using a modified Delphi process by the Reverse Innovation Working Group, consisting of 31 experts in medicine, engineering, management and political science, as well as representatives from industry and government, all with an expressed interest in reverse innovation.
The resulting 8 criteria are divided into two steps with a simple scoring system. First, innovations are assessed according to their success within the LMIC context according to metrics of improving accessibility, cost-effectiveness, scalability, and overall effectiveness. Next, they are scored for their potential for spread to HICs, according to their ability to address an HIC healthcare challenge, compatibility with infrastructure and regulatory requirements, degree of novelty, and degree of current collaboration with HICs. We use examples to illustrate where programs which appear initially promising may be unlikely to succeed in a HIC setting due to feasibility concerns.
This study presents a framework for identifying reverse innovations that may be useful to policymakers and funding agencies interested in identifying novel approaches to addressing cost and access to care in HICs. We solicited expert feedback and consensus on an empirically-derived set of criteria to create a practical tool for funders that can be used directly and tested prospectively using current databases of LMIC programs.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BioMed Central Ltd</pub><pmid>28122623</pmid><doi>10.1186/s12992-016-0225-1</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1744-8603 |
ispartof | Globalization and health, 2017-01, Vol.13 (1), p.4-4, Article 4 |
issn | 1744-8603 1744-8603 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5264440 |
source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; PubMed Central Open Access; Springer Nature OA Free Journals |
subjects | Adaptation Cooperative Behavior Costs Delivery of Health Care - classification Delivery of Health Care - economics Delivery of Health Care - methods Delphi method Developed Countries Developing Countries Diffusion of Innovation Funding GNI Gross National Income Health promotion Health Services Accessibility - classification Health Services Accessibility - standards Humans Innovations International aspects Internationality Learning Literature reviews Low income groups Medical innovations Methodology Product development Qualitative Research Working groups |
title | Criteria to assess potential reverse innovations: opportunities for shared learning between high- and low-income countries |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-15T19%3A50%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Criteria%20to%20assess%20potential%20reverse%20innovations:%20opportunities%20for%20shared%20learning%20between%20high-%20and%20low-income%20countries&rft.jtitle=Globalization%20and%20health&rft.au=Bhattacharyya,%20Onil&rft.date=2017-01-25&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=4&rft.epage=4&rft.pages=4-4&rft.artnum=4&rft.issn=1744-8603&rft.eissn=1744-8603&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/s12992-016-0225-1&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA480609065%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1864968287&rft_id=info:pmid/28122623&rft_galeid=A480609065&rfr_iscdi=true |