1. Promoting the Use of ‘Reproductive Health Results’ Towards greater synergy

2. Some refocusing of the topic w Sexual health research not ‘reproductive health results’ w Critical perspective on events, not just advice on how to ‘do it better’

3. Dominant model w Rich countries identify ‘problems’ w Rich countries send researchers and intervention specialists to poorer ones w Poorer countries ‘collaborate’ with richer countries w Richer countries ‘learn’ w Richer countries ‘transfer’ this learning to poorer ones w Poorer countries are invited to participate in further research

4. Some problems and difficulties w Are the ‘correct’ problems addressed? w In a way that builds capacity? w And is a way which is sustainable? w Does such research lead to the development of context appropriate explanations, programmes and interventions? w Who benefits most?

5. An ‘alternative’ approach w Work collectively to identify ‘problems’ and issues w Frame within local terms w Jointly develop projects and approaches w On site training and support w Joint analysis and dissemination w ‘Transfer’ in both directions

6. Role of richer countries w Facilitate identification and conceptualisation of issues of concern w Support development of context specific protocols and approaches w Facilitate access to financial and other resources w Provide training and support where needed w Assist in analysis and international dissemination of findings and best practice

7. Some problems and challenges w Government and official denial w ‘Traditional’ and ‘religious’ beliefs w The interface between enquiry, advocacy and social policy w The role of mediators w Research as prevarication w Maintaining a critical perspective

8. Some final comments …. w How best can the research-policy interface be bridged? w What are the qualities we should be encouraging in researchers? w What is the role of research ‘mediators’? w How can we cultivate an informed yet critical humility on the part of researchers?