Enhancing cultural sensitivity in the implementation of the Fertility Quality of Life Tool in Sudan: a science diplomacy perspective
Authors: Bayoumi Rasha R. , Koert Emily , Boivin Jacky , McConnell Margaret , Wolde Betelhem , Siddiqui Fatima , Elmusharaf Khalifa , Viswanath Kasisomayajula 
Published: August 2024

Background

Infertility is a global health challenge impacting quality of life, particularly in low and middle-income countries such as Sudan. The Fertility Quality of Life (FertiQoL) tool, a standardized questionnaire, is pivotal in assessing fertility-related quality of life. However, existing research on its utility has primarily been conducted in Global North and High-Income Countries, highlighting the need to shift away from neocolonialism to promote truly inclusive research and effective healthcare practices. Science diplomacy, through the adaptation and culturally sensitive implementation of research tools, can serve as a catalyst for addressing health disparities on a global scale. This study aims to assess methodological and cultural considerations that impact the implementation of the FertiQoL tool in Sudan, framed within the context of science diplomacy and neocolonialism. By investigating the challenges and opportunities of utilizing this tool in a non-Western cultural setting, we seek to contribute to the broader discussion on decolonizing global health research.

Methods

Utilizing an explanatory sequential design involving surveys and interviews, we conducted a study in a Sudanese fertility clinic from November 2017 to May 2018. A total of 102 participants were recruited using convenience sampling, providing socio-demographic, medical, and reproductive history data. The Arabic version of FertiQoL was administered, with 20 participants interviewed and 82 surveyed (40 self-administered and 42 provider-administered). We applied descriptive statistics, one-way ANOVA, thematic analysis, and triangulation to explore methodological and cultural nuances.

Results

Most participants were educated women who lived in urban areas. While the ANOVA results revealed no statistically significant differences in FertiQoL scores based on the mode of administration [core score (F(2,99) = 1.58, p = 0.21, η2 = 0.03) and domain scores: emotional (F(2,99) = 1.85, p = 0.16, η2 = 0.04); mind/body (F(2,99) = 1.95, p = 0.15, η2 = 0.04); relational (F(2,99) = 0.18, p = 0.83, η2 = 0.04); and social (F(2,99) = 1.67, p = 0.19, η2 = 0.03)], qualitative insights unveiled vital cultural considerations. Interpretation challenges related to concepts like hope and jealousy emerged during interviews. Notably, the social domain of FertiQoL was found to inadequately capture the social pressures experienced by infertile individuals in Sudan, underscoring the importance of region-specific research. Despite these challenges, participants perceived FertiQoL as a comprehensive and valuable tool with broader utility beyond assessing fertility-related quality of life.

Conclusion

Our findings emphasize the significance of incorporating cultural sensitivity into the interpretation of FertiQoL scores when implementing it globally. This approach aligns with the principles of science diplomacy and challenges neocolonial structures by acknowledging the unique lived experiences of local populations. By fostering cross-cultural understanding and inclusivity in research, we can enhance the implementation of FertiQoL and pave the way for novel interventions, increased funding, and policy developments in the Global South, ultimately promoting equitable global health.