A survey-based approach to research equity within Uganda-United States HIV research partnerships

International research partnerships are a cornerstone of scientific innovation in global health. Despite many benefits, research partnership can also inadvertently reinforce asymmetries in power and resources between researchers based in high-income countries (HICs) and low-/middle-income countries (LMICs). The objective of this study was to use a survey-based approach to assess perceptions and experiences with equitable and inequitable research partnership practices within Uganda-US HIV research partnerships. We used clustered random sampling to invite researchers in Ugandan-US research partnerships to complete a survey. The survey contained 61 Likert questions arranged in categories of (1) responsibilities and professionalism, (2) research context, (3) funding, and (4) capacity building plus 21 multiple-choice questions addressing accountability for outcomes. Responses were compared using standard descriptive statistics. Qualitative responses were analyzed using exploratory thematic analysis. Eighty researchers from Uganda ( n = 46) and the US ( n = 34) completed the survey. Several subcategories routinely demonstrated more positive perceptions of equitable practices by US respondents as compared to Ugandan respondents including structural divisions of labor within partnerships, transparency within research partner motivations and intentions, post-study access to research technology and intellectual property, and perceptions that research in LMICs is held to the same scientific and ethical standards as research in HICs. Both groups otherwise had similar neutral/agreement scores across the domain of scientific capacity strengthening and neutral/disagreement scores across the domains of equitable research funding, administrative capacity strengthening, and institutional capacity strengthening. There was a high degree of individual-level response variability across nearly all questions and themes. Ugandan respondents emphasized the responsibility of LMIC institutions and researchers to identify and advocate for desired outcomes, whereas US respondents emphasized shared responsibility between partners. Both groups also frequently identified research funders as influential actors. The survey detected systematic differences in how partners within international research collaborations perceive equity-related practices, policies and outcomes. US respondents often reported meeting equity-related metrics more often than Ugandan respondents around partnership-specific processes and contributions to the research. Answers between both groups differed less on structural constraints related to funding and research capacity building. This approach offers a practical entry point for further dialogue and targeted intervention within international research collaborations.