Addressing the "Global Health Tax" and "Wild Cards": Practical Challenges to Building Academic Careers in Global Health

Bringing Generalists to Global Health: a Missed Opportunity and Call to Action

The credo of the generalist physician has always been the promotion of health for all, in every aspect: not just multiple vulnerable organ systems, but multiple social, cultural, and political factors that contribute to poor health and exacerbate health inequity. In recent years, the field of global health has also adopted this same mission: working across both national and clinical specialty borders to improve health for all and end health disparities worldwide. Yet within the Society for General Internal Medicine, and among American generalists, engagement in global health, both within and outside the USA, remains uncommon. We see this gap as an opportunity, because in fact generalists in America already have the skills and experience that global health badly needs. SGIM could promote generalists to global health's vanguard, with three core steps. First, we generalists must continue to integrate health for the vulnerable into our domestic work, generating care models applicable in low-resource settings around the globe. Conversely, we must also engage with and implement international ideas and solutions for universal access to primary care for vulnerable patients in the USA. And lastly, we must build platforms to connect ourselves with colleagues worldwide to exchange these learnings.

Characteristics of Global Health Careers among Graduates of a Global Health Equity Residency Training Program in the United States

Background

The number of global health (GH) physician training programs in the United States has increased in the past decade. Few studies have explored the demographics of individuals in these programs, the impact of global health training on career development, and specific factors associated with whether graduates achieve a career in global health.

Objectives

We aimed to describe characteristics of program graduates and quantify which previously identified factors were associated with achieving a self-defined career in GH among a cohort of graduates from one GH post-graduate training program in a highly resourced academic medical center in the United States between 2003 and 2018.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey and analyzed differences between participants who self-identified as having a career in GH compared to those who did not.

Findings

Among 59 individuals invited to participate, 53 (89.9%) responded to the survey. Having a GH mentor was associated with having a career in GH (OR 10.3; p = 0.004). Those who had a GH career were more likely to have a clearly-defined career path (p = 0.03), have institutional support in their current job (p = 0.00006), be able to manage the split between their GH and non-GH work (p = 0.0001), find funding to achieve their objectives in GH (p = 0.01), invest in their personal and family life (p = 0.05), and split work abroad and domestically with few challenges (p = 0.01).

Conclusions

We present sociodemographic and career characteristics for graduates from a GH training program in a highly resourced academic medical center in the United States. Mentorship, institutional support, funding, ability to balance GH with non-GH work, and time spent domestically or abroad are key factors associated with successful careers in GH. If institutional funding is allocated to strengthen these aspects of GH training, we anticipate more sustained GH career development.

International medical electives in Sub-Saharan Africa: experiences from a 19-year NGO-driven initiative

BACKGROUND

Mainstream medical education remains largely focused on national health issues. Therefore, in order to expose medical students to international health issues, it is beneficial to facilitate international medical electives.

METHODS

This article describes the Junior Project Officer (JPO) program, a medical experience based on clinical electives in Sub-Saharan Africa, supported by a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO). Residents spend 6 months as part of a multidisciplinary medical team in Africa. A post-elective online survey was administered to all who participated in the program in the period 2002-2020. The questionnaire comprised three domains: (i) general and pre-departure information; (ii) the experience; (iii) the post-experience.

RESULTS

Questionnaires were received from 157/241 subjects, a response rate of 65%. The most common specialties were pediatrics, public health, and internal medicine. Of all, 87% carried out clinical activities; 45% also worked in the management of health services, and 60% carried out research activities. About 64% reported difficulties linked to a lack of equipment, different ways of working (57%), and exposure to situations for which they did not feel technically prepared (56%). In 25% of cases, residents reported that their school's attitude to their doing the elective was not positive: upon their return, over 50% felt that their experience was not sufficiently valued by their institution. Respondents considered the experience important for professional and personal growth (93% and 80% respectively ). Forty-two participants (27%) reported that the experience had a significant impact on their future career choices.

CONCLUSION

Despite the difficulties encountered, a well-structured experience in international health can have a positive impact on residents, professionally and personally. Key factors behind the positive outcomes are the substantial length (6 months) of the experience, and the long term working relationships between the sending and receiving institutions. The schools in Italy that provide the students for the electives need to see more evidence that international electives are worth the investment.

Institutionalising global health: a call for ethical reflection

We describe a global health course and pedagogy that highlights the moral ambiguity and many ethical compromises that have emerged as the discipline has increasingly become institutionalised. We encourage students to reflect on how the oft-declared aspiration for global health equity still remains seriously contested as a normative and political matter, especially in settings like the USA. We further encourage students to reflect on how authentic concern for social justice, health equity and human rights are consistently undermined by unconscious and/or intentional fealty to standard operating procedures within hierarchical structures and systems. Lastly, we encourage students to openly question and critique the dominant socioeconomic and institutional paradigms that influence practitioner ways of thinking about global health. Our aim is to provide a learning space for students to at least imagine, if not demand, more daring modes of engagement. We also encourage our colleagues in the global health education community to be forthright that the process of institutionalising global health reliably favours our own interests more than those we claim to be most concerned about. If the ideal of global health is to build a bridge to human solidarity, we see substantial risk that current popularised approaches might never yield a structural tipping point.

Global Health Perspectives Among Radiation Oncology Residency Program Directors: A Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Survey

PURPOSE

Interest in global health has risen among medical students applying to and residents training in radiation oncology, often outpacing available educational offerings. The Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Global Health Subcommittee sought to determine the perceptions of program directors (PDs) in radiation oncology and their current or planned global health curricular opportunities.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A standardized, Knowledge-Attitudes-Practices survey composed of 32 binary items was sent to PDs for all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited radiation oncology programs.

RESULTS

The program response rate was 60% (55 of 91). Responding programs were distributed evenly geographically and included a range of training program sizes. Most PDs (77%) knew that most nations did not meet standard minimum benchmarks for radiation therapy access. Although 89% would support residents in pursuing global health rotations, only 22% would support departmental funding of such rotations. Furthermore, 94% believed that global health was a field worthy of an academic career, but only 39% believed that it had appropriate rigor. Only 8% of programs had dedicated global health rotations.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiation oncology PDs largely expressed favorable views of global health as a pursuit and affirmed a high degree of resident and medical student interest. However, faculty commitment and program offerings currently lag behind the interest level. In particular, a substantial number of PDs do not perceive global health to be a rigorous academic endeavor. Future progress in academic global health in radiation oncology will require strategies to systematically support pathways for the development of experience and scholarship both within and beyond residency.

Rethinking Goals: Transforming Short-Term Global Health Experiences Into Engagements

The authors challenge the conventional wisdom guiding what participants in short-term experiences in global health (STEGHs) should be learning. Medical students and residents from the United States have been told to focus on standardized competencies and ethical principles, in addition to the biomedical knowledge, skills, and attitudes highlighted by working internationally. The authors suggest that although these training goals are important, they may divert learners from developing their professional identities in ways that contribute to the health of all persons, especially those who are economically poor and socially marginalized. The authors postulate that such a professional transformation will occur only if STEGH participants attend to 5 key learning goals: develop contextual inquisitiveness, grow in insightful understanding, nurture global humility, cultivate structural awareness, and critically engage in the pursuit of creating equitable and just societies. Further, the authors argue that only by attending to these goals will any genuine change in the root causes of inequities in health outcomes occur. The authors review these goals and encourage their use for professional and pedagogical purposes over the duration of any STEGH-before departure, while in host communities, and upon return home.

Landscape of Global Oncology Research and Training at National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers: Results of the 2018 to 2019 Global Oncology Survey

PURPOSE

The National Cancer Institute (NCI)-Designated Cancer Centers (NDCCs) are active in global oncology research and training, leading collaborations to support global cancer control. To better understand global oncology activities led by NDCCs, the NCI Center for Global Health collaborated with ASCO to conduct the 2018/2019 NCI/ASCO Global Oncology Survey of NDCCs.

METHODS

Seventy NDCCs received a two-part survey that focused on global oncology programs at NDCCs and non-National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded global oncology projects with an international collaborator led by the NDCCs. Sixty-seven NDCCs responded to the survey. Data were coded and analyzed by NCI-Center for Global Health staff.

RESULTS

Thirty-three NDCCs (47%) reported having a global oncology program, and 61 (87%) reported a collective total of 613 non-NIH-funded global oncology projects. Of the NDCCs with global oncology programs, 17 reported that trainees completed rotations outside the United States and the same number enrolled trainees from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Primary focus areas of non-NIH-funded projects were research (469 [76.5%]) and capacity building or training (197 [32.1%]). Projects included collaborators from 110 countries; 68 of these were LMIC.

CONCLUSION

This survey shows that there is a substantial amount of global oncology research and training conducted by NDCCs and that much of this is happening in LMIC. Trends in these data reflect those in recent literature: The field of global oncology is growing, advancing scientific knowledge, contributing to building research and training capacity in LMIC, and becoming a recognized career path. Results of the 2018 Global Oncology Survey can be used to foster opportunities for NDCCs to work collaboratively on activities and to share their findings with relevant stakeholders in their LMIC collaborator countries.

Barriers to participation in global surgery academic collaborations, and possible solutions: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

There is a global lack of access to surgical care, and this issue disproportionately affects those in low- and middle-income countries. Global surgery academic collaborations (GSACs) between surgeons in high-income countries and those in low- and middle-income countries are one possible sustainable way to address the global surgical need. The objective of this study was to examine the barriers to participation in GSACs and to suggest ways to increase involvement.

METHODS

A convenience sample of 86 surgeons, anesthesiologists, other physicians, residents, fellows, and nurses from the US, Canada, and Norway was used. Participants were all health care providers from multiple specialties and multiple academic centers with varied involvement in GSACs. More than half of the participants were neurosurgeons. Participants were interviewed in person or over Skype in Toronto over the course of 2 months by using a predetermined set of open-ended questions. Thematic content analysis was used to evaluate the participants' responses.

RESULTS

Based on the data, 3 main themes arose that pointed to individual, community, and system barriers for involvement in GSACs. Individual barriers included loss of income, family commitments, young career, responsibility to local patients, skepticism of global surgery efforts, ethical concerns, and safety concerns. Community barriers included insufficient mentorship and lack of support from colleagues. System barriers included lack of time, minimal academic recognition, insufficient awareness, insufficient administrative support and organization, and low political and funding support.

CONCLUSIONS

Steps can be taken to address some of these barriers and to increase the involvement of surgeons from high-income countries in GSACs. This could lead to a necessary scale-up of global surgery efforts that may help increase worldwide access to surgical care.

Training Toward a Movement: Career Development Insights From the First 7 Years of a Global Health Equity Residency

BACKGROUND

The Doris and Howard Hiatt Residency in Global Health Equity and Internal Medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital provides global health training during residency, but little is known about its effect on participants' selection of a global health career.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the perceptions of residency graduates from the first 7 classes to better understand the outcomes of this education program, and the challenges faced by participants.

METHODS

We interviewed 27 of 31 physicians (87%) who graduated from the program between 2003 and 2013 using a convergent mixed-methods design and a structured interview tool that included both open-ended and forced-choice questions. We independently coded and analyzed qualitative data using a case study design, and then wove together the qualitative and quantitative data at the interpretation phase using a parallel convergent mixed-methods design.

RESULTS

Entering a career focused on social justice was cited as the most common motivator for selecting to train in global health. Most respondents (83%, 20 of 24) reported they were able to achieve this goal despite structural barriers, such as lower salaries compared with peers, a lack of mentors in the field, poorly structured and undersupported career pathways at their institutions, and unique work-life challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

A majority of graduates from 1 dedicated residency program in global health and internal medicine reported they were able to continue to engage in global health activities after graduation and, despite identified challenges, reported that they planned long-term careers in global health.

Power, potential, and pitfalls in global health academic partnerships: review and reflections on an approach in Nepal

Background: Global health academic partnerships are centered around a core tension: they often mirror or reproduce the very cross-national inequities they seek to alleviate. On the one hand, they risk worsening power dynamics that perpetuate health disparities; on the other, they form an essential response to the need for healthcare resources to reach marginalized populations across the globe.

Objectives: This study characterizes the broader landscape of global health academic partnerships, including challenges to developing ethical, equitable, and sustainable models. It then lays out guiding principles of the specific partnership approach, and considers how lessons learned might be applied in other resource-limited settings.

Methods: The experience of a partnership between the Ministry of Health in Nepal, the non-profit healthcare provider Possible, and the Health Equity Action and Leadership Initiative at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine was reviewed. The quality and effectiveness of the partnership was assessed using the Tropical Health and Education Trust Principles of Partnership framework.

Results: Various strategies can be taken by partnerships to better align the perspectives of patients and public sector providers with those of expatriate physicians. Actions can also be taken to bring greater equity to the wealth and power gaps inherent within global health academic partnerships.

Conclusions: This study provides recommendations gleaned from the analysis, with an aim towards both future refinement of the partnership and broader applications of its lessons and principles. It specifically highlights the importance of targeted engagements with academic medical centers and the need for efficient organizational work-flow practices. It considers how to both prioritize national and host institution goals, and meet the career development needs of global health clinicians.

Medical Student Perceptions of Global Surgery at an Academic Institution: Identifying Gaps in Global Health Education

PURPOSE

Robust global health demands access to safe, affordable, timely surgical care for all. The long-term success of global surgery requires medical students to understand and engage with this emerging field. The authors characterized medical students' perceptions of surgical care relative to other fields within global health.

METHOD

An optional, anonymous survey was given to all Johns Hopkins medical students from February to March 2016 to assess perceptions of surgical care and its role in global health.

RESULTS

Of 480 students, 365 (76%) completed the survey, with 150 (41%) reporting global health interests. One-third (34%) of responding students felt that surgical care is one of two fields with the greatest potential global health impact in the future, second to infectious disease (49%). A minority (28%) correctly identified that trauma results in more deaths worldwide than obstetric complications or HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria combined. Relative to other examined fields, students perceived surgical care as the least preventive and cost-effective, and few students (3%) considered adequate surgical care the best indicator of a robust health care system. Students believed that practicing in a surgical field was least amenable to pursuing a global health career, citing several barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical students have several perceptions of global surgery that contradict current evidence and literature, which may have implications for their career choices. Opportunities to improve students' global health knowledge and awareness of global surgery career paths include updating curricula, fostering meaningful international academic opportunities, and creating centers of global surgery and global health consortia.

Global Health Career Interest among Medical and Nursing Students: Survey and Analysis

BACKGROUND

Global health experiences undertaken in international settings (GHEs) are becoming an increasingly prevalent aspect of health professions education and, as such, merit comprehensive analysis of the impact they have on students and host communities.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the associations between demographic/experiential factors and the interest of health professions students in careers involving global health.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was administered online to a convenience sample of medical and nursing students at Johns Hopkins University. Questions addressed level of interest in a global health career, prior GHEs, and demographic information. Items were either Likert scale or multiple choice. Various regression analyses were performed.

FINDINGS

Of 510 respondents, 312 (61.2%) expressed interest in a global health career and 285 (55.9%) had prior GHEs. Multivariate logistic regression found female sex, age ≥27 years, household income <$100,000/y, and a prior research-related GHE independently associated with higher interest in global health careers. On subset analysis of participants with one or more prior GHEs: age ≥27 years, household income <$100,000/y, a prior research-related GHE, and having multiple GHEs were each independently associated with increased interest in a global health career.

CONCLUSIONS

Simply participating in a global health experience abroad is not significantly associated with interest in a global health career. However, sex, age, household income, and research-related GHEs are significantly associated with global health career interest. These findings may inform the development of global health programs at medical and nursing schools and can guide efforts to increase the number of health care professionals entering global health careers.

Reframing undergraduate medical education in global health: Rationale and key principles from the Bellagio Global Health Education Initiative

Global health education (GHE) continues to be a growing initiative in many medical schools across the world. This focus is no longer limited to participants from high-income countries and has expanded to institutions and students from low- and middle-income settings. With this shift has come a need to develop meaningful curricula through engagement between educators and learners who represent the sending institutions and the diverse settings in which GHE takes place. The Bellagio Global Health Education Initiative (BGHEI) was founded to create a space for such debate and discussion and to generate guidelines towards a universal curriculum for global health. In this article, we describe the development and process of our work and outline six overarching principles that ought to be considered when adopting an inclusive approach to GHE curriculum development.

The future of global health education: training for equity in global health

BACKGROUND

Among academic institutions in the United States, interest in global health has grown substantially: by the number of students seeking global health opportunities at all stages of training, and by the increase in institutional partnerships and newly established centers, institutes, and initiatives to house global health programs at undergraduate, public health and medical schools. Witnessing this remarkable growth should compel health educators to question whether the training and guidance that we provide to students today is appropriate, and whether it will be applicable in the next decade and beyond. Given that "global health" did not exist as an academic discipline in the United States 20 years ago, what can we expect it will look like 20 years from now and how can we prepare for that future?

DISCUSSION

Most clinicians and trainees today recognize the importance of true partnership and capacity building in both directions for successful international collaborations. The challenge is in the execution of these practices. There are projects around the world where this is occurring and equitable partnerships have been established. Based on our experience and observations of the current landscape of academic global health, we share a perspective on principles of engagement, highlighting instances where partnerships have thrived, and examples of where we, as a global community, have fallen short.

CONCLUSIONS

As the world moves beyond the charity model of global health (and its colonial roots), it is evident that the issue underlying ethical global health practice is partnership and the pursuit of health equity. Thus, achieving equity in global health education and practice ought to be central to our mission as educators and advisors when preparing trainees for careers in this field. Seeking to eliminate health inequities wherever they are ingrained will reveal the injustices around the globe and in our own cities and towns.