Canada's contribution to neglected tropical disease research: a co-authorship network analysis.

Objective: NTDs are a group of thirteen communicable diseases that thrive in impoverished settings and are a prime example of a global health issue in need of collaborative research solutions. The aim of this study was to design and apply an accessible yet systematic approach for analyzing the publication trends and collaboration structure of Canada’s neglected tropical disease (NTD) research network. Co-authorship network analysis is an emerging technique for understanding the complex dimensions and results of collaborative research.

Methods: Multiple methods and measures were used to support this study including: an academic and grey literature review; a systematic bibliometric procedure (publication activity, quality, specializations and collaboration rates) and a co-authorship network analysis (network size, components, density, cliques, clustering, centralization and core-periphery) of countries and institutions contributing to Canada’s NTD research.

Results: Over the past sixty years (1950-2010) there has been a notable increase in Canada’s NTD publication activity. Canada’s NTD researchers specialize in Leishmania and African sleeping sickness research and are mainly affiliated with academic institutions within Canada (McGill University, Laval University and University of British Columbia). International co-authorship activity is largely with OECD countries (United States, United Kingdom and France) and some non-OECD countries (Brazil, Iran, and Peru). The core of Canada’s NTD research network includes a tightly connected group of OECD countries and two African countries (Uganda and Kenya). The countries on the periphery of the network are predominantly non-OECD countries which fall within the networks lowest GDP percentile. Canada’s Leishmania research network is regionally clustered with central ‘bridging’ and ‘bonding’ institutions. This contrasts to the more permeable structure of Canada’s African sleeping sickness institution network.

Conclusion: The methods and findings from this study implicate Canada’s global health research and institutional policies. The findings suggest that if North-South research collaborations are a strategic global health funding priority, then methods and mechanisms to map existing networks and leverage the work of leading and emerging researchers and institutions are needed. Support to reform Canadian institutional policies related to inventions, patenting and technology transfer is required to transform existing insular practices and incentivize global health innovation and research partnerships.