The World Health Organization and the transition from "international" to "global" public health

The Role of Health Care and Health Security in War, Disaster & Crisis Preparedness

Health care and health security are the fundamental pillars of disaster preparedness and crisis management. An established routine health care is necessary for any society, enabling full access to care and fulfilling the rights of every individual. Health security, on the other hand, is what a society needs to be flexible in managing an unexpected situation. To overcome a disaster with minimal damage or to avert such a critical situation, health care and health security should exist simultaneously. Thus, resilience in disaster preparedness and crisis management requires investment in both health care and health security. This ensures local public health services and infrastructure, local ambulances, both acute and chronic care referral systems, prompt vaccinations, and prevention of communicable diseases to name but a few. These measures which have proven to be the most sensitive evaluation of fair governance are critically absent in several nations, particularly in areas with long-standing conflicts. Strengthening health care and health security measures are paramount to the maintenance of the health system in peace and recovery of health delivery post-conflict and require political and economic considerations.

Is qualitative social research in global health fulfilling its potential?: a systematic evidence mapping of research on point-of-care testing in low- and middle-income contexts

BACKGROUND

Qualitative social research has made valuable contributions to understanding technology-based interventions in global health. However, we have little evidence of who is carrying out this research, where, how, for what purpose, or the overall scope of this body of work. To address these questions, we undertook a systematic evidence mapping of one area of technology-focused research in global health, related to the development, deployment and use of point-of-care tests (POCTs) for low-and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

We conducted an exhaustive search to identify papers reporting on primary qualitative studies that explore the development, deployment, and use of POCTs in LMICs and screened results to identify studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted from included studies and descriptive analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-eight studies met our inclusion criteria, with numbers increasing year by year. Funding of studies was primarily credited to high income country (HIC)-based institutions (95%) and 64% of first authors were affiliated with HIC-based institutions. Study sites, in contrast, were concentrated in a small number of LMICs. Relatively few studies examined social phenomena related to POCTs that take place in HICs. Seventy-one percent of papers reported on studies conducted within the context of a trial or intervention. Eighty percent reported on studies considering POCTs for HIV and/or malaria. Studies overwhelmingly reported on POCT use (91%) within primary-level health facilities (60%) or in hospitals (30%) and explored the perspectives of the health workforce (70%).

CONCLUSIONS

A reflexive approach to the role, status, and contribution of qualitative and social science research is crucial to identifying the contributions it can make to the production of global health knowledge and understanding the roles technology can play in achieving global health goals. The body of qualitative social research on POCTs for LMICs is highly concentrated in scope, overwhelmingly focuses on testing in the context of a narrow number of donor-supported initiatives and is driven by HIC resources and expertise. To optimise the full potential of qualitative social research requires the promotion of open and just research ecosystems that broaden the scope of inquiry beyond established public health paradigms and build social science capacity in LMICs.

Latin America at the margins? Implications of the geographic and epistemic narrowing of 'global' health

To explore the narrowing of the concept of 'global' in global health, this article traces how Latin America has held a place of both privilege and power as well as marginalisation in the field. We employ a modified extended case method to examine how Latin America has been 'seen' and 'heard' in understandings of global health, underscoring the region's shifting role as a key site for research and practice in 'tropical medicine' from the mid-nineteenth century through World War II, to a major player and recipient of development assistance throughout the 'international health' era after World War II until the late twentieth century, to a region progressively marginalised within 'global health' since the mid-1980s/1990s. We argue that the progressive marginalisation of Latin America and Southern theory has not only hurt health equity and services, but also demonstrates the fundamental flaws in contemporary 'global' thinking. The narrowing of global health constitutes coloniality of power, with Northern institutions largely defining priority regions and epistemic approaches to health globally, thus impoverishing the field from the intellectual resources, political experience, and wisdom of Latin America's long traditions of social medicine and collective health.

Cooperators or competitors? The interactions between WHO and the World Bank in global health governance

Interactions between International Organisations (IOs) within a regime complex often manifest themselves through competition and cooperation. Current research has examined the factors that promote inter-organisational competition and cooperation, yet the precise timing of when such competition or cooperation commences remains unclear. This paper focuses on two pivotal IOs in global health governance, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Bank, to explore the timing and onset of competition and cooperation within a regime complex, as well as the driving factors in the evolution of their inter-organisational relationships. By looking into the interactions between the WHO and the World Bank in norm-setting and resource mobilising, the paper sheds light on how their relationships have transitioned from competitors to cooperators. It systematically presents the mechanisms and processes of policy transformation in inter-organisational interactions. As a new agenda arises, IOs within a regime complex often compete for dominance, with ideational differences driving them to propose and implement distinct governance strategies. They will compete for resources and mainstream of their strategy. The negative spillover effects of competitive policies consequently undermine the effectiveness of IOs' policy, thereby undercut their legitimacy. To surmount these challenges, the international community should promote inter-institutional coordination in global governance.

Navigating resistance in global health governance: Certification of smallpox eradication in China

Certification is an essential stage in disease eradication efforts, encompassing epidemiological, managerial, and political complexities. The certification of smallpox eradication in the People's Republic of China (PRC, or China) exemplifies the multifaceted nature of the certification. Despite eradicating smallpox in the early 1960s, before the Global Smallpox Eradication Programme (SEP) intensified in 1967, China was one of the last countries certified as smallpox-free by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1979. The WHO encountered notable resistance during the certification of smallpox eradication in China. This article examines the underlying motivations propelling China's resistance, the factors that contributed to the shifts in its stance, the challenges navigated by the WHO, and the ultimate achievement of certification despite controversies surrounding its transparency and credibility. Through the case of the certification of smallpox eradication, the article provides a historical context of China's selective engagement in global health governance, emphasising the critical importance of building a trusting relationship between the WHO and its member states. It offers insights for fostering effective collaboration among diverse stakeholders driven by varied political agendas in addressing shared global health challenges such as the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.

Public management of public healthcare under the COVID-19 outbreak: experience of Ukraine

OBJECTIVE

Aim: The research is aimed to study certain aspects and experience of functioning of the Ukrainian Public Healthcare public management mechanisms during an outbreak of the acute respiratory disease COVID19.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and Methods: The studied materials include personal observations and accumulated practical material, as well as generalization of the collected data and their empirical treatment, conducted by the scientists, according to the present legislation requirements. The study was held using general scientific methods, including observation, description of results, specification and statistical data generalization.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: Generalization, arrangement and analysis of the Ukrainian experience of the Public Healthcare public management during the outbreak of the acute respiratory disease COVID19, provides exchange of experience between all subjects of the process. This helps to produce certain practical decisions, aimed at effective responding of the state healthcare system onto management of the COVID19 outbreak. Such activities are also directed at detection of flaws in the whole system, with their subsequent correction, and elimination or neutralization of possible negative outcomes. To adopt the priority activity directions within public relations, which make the subject of the study, the authors have studied a complex of activities against spread of the COVID19 in 2019-2020. These activities include issues, related to prompt responding onto the infection spread and approving quick professional decisions; fulfilling epidemiological supervision and introducing anti-epidemic activities; providing diagnostics, and accessibility of the safe and high-quality vaccine.

Social Determinants of Health: An Overview for the Primary Care Provider

Social determinants of health (SDoH) are reflected in how people live (access to health care, economic stability, built environment, food security, climate), learn (the educational environment), work (occupational environment), and play/socialize (social context and digital domain). All of these day-to-day conditions play a vital role in a patient's overall health, and a primary care provider should be prepared to understand their role to screen, assess, and address SDoH in clinical practice.

Hybrid health regimes: Access to primary care physicians and COVID-19 vaccine uptake across municipalities in Romania

This study analyses COVID-19 vaccine uptake at the municipal level in Romania using the global health regimes and vaccine hesitancy perspectives. Our spatial regression (SARAR-het Durbin) shows that the number of primary care physicians is a significant predictor of vaccine uptake, and municipalities with higher access to the labour market have higher vaccination rates. We provide a historical perspective to demonstrate that the current health regime in Romania is a hybrid of internationalist and global health regimes, with socialist investments affecting labour participation, education, poverty, and vaccination rates. Our findings highlight the impact of regional disparities and partial privatization of the health system.

Public-private partnerships influencing the initiation and duration of clinical trials for neglected tropical diseases

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) for neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) are often studied as an organizational form that facilitates the management and control of the huge costs of drug research and development. Especially the later stages of drug development, including clinical trials, become very expensive. This present study investigates whether and how the type of PPPs influences the initiation and duration of NTD clinical trials. Using the ClinicalTrials.gov database, a dataset of 1175 NTD clinical studies that started between 2000 and 2021 is analyzed based on affiliation information and project duration. For the NTD clinical trials that resulted from PPPs, the collaborating types were determined and analyzed, including the public sector-, private sector-, governmental sector-, and nongovernmental organization-led collaborations. The determinants for the discontinuation of all stopped clinical trials were categorized into scientific-, funding-, political-, and logistic dimensions. The results reveal that public sector-led PPPs were the most common collaborative types, and logistic and scientific issues were the most frequent determinants of stopped clinical trials. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov.

Applying a Social Determinants of Health Framework to Guide Digital Innovations That Reduce Disparities in Chronic Disease

ABSTRACT

Chronic diseases are among the top causes of global death, disability, and health care expenditure. Digital health interventions (e.g., patient support delivered via technologies such as smartphones, wearables, videoconferencing, social media, and virtual reality) may prevent and mitigate chronic disease by facilitating accessible, personalized care. Although these tools have promise to reach historically marginalized groups, who are disproportionately affected by chronic disease, evidence suggests that digital health interventions could unintentionally exacerbate health inequities. This commentary outlines opportunities to harness recent advancements in technology and research design to drive equitable digital health intervention development and implementation. We apply "calls to action" from the World Health Organization Commission on Social Determinants of Health conceptual framework to the development of new, and refinement of existing, digital health interventions that aim to prevent or treat chronic disease by targeting intermediary, social, and/or structural determinants of health. Three mirrored "calls to action" are thus proposed for digital health research: a) develop, implement, and evaluate multilevel, context-specific digital health interventions; b) engage in intersectoral partnerships to advance digital health equity and social equity more broadly; and c) include and empower historically marginalized groups to develop, implement, and access digital health interventions. Using these "action items," we review several technological and methodological innovations for designing, evaluating, and implementing digital health interventions that have greater potential to reduce health inequities. We also enumerate possible challenges to conducting this work, including leading interdisciplinary collaborations, diversifying the scientific workforce, building trustworthy community relationships, and evolving health care and digital infrastructures.

Public-Private Partnerships and the Landscape of Neglected Tropical Disease Research: The Shifting Logic and Spaces of Knowledge Production

Until the recent spread of public-private partnerships, pharmaceutical firms had avoided research and development into neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). Because these are diseases that affect the poorest populations in developing regions, research and development initiatives have for the most part depended on the resources and expertise drawn from academia, international organizations, and intermittent state interventions in disease-endemic countries. Over the last few decades, however, public-private product development partnerships (PDPs) have been introducing new collaborative agreements in which the existing resources and expertise combine with the those traditionally withheld by the pharmaceutical industry and global health NGOs. This paper explores recent transformations in the representation of NTDs by examining the shifting logic and spaces of knowledge production which the advent of PDPs has enabled. An analysis of two case studies focused on Chagas disease-related initiatives addresses recurring preoccupations in Science, Technology and Society studies as well as in critical analyses of PDPs: that is, the back-and-forth movement of the disease from being an object of scientific inquiry to a public health concern, and the legitimacy risks and material asymmetries entailed in global health PDPs. Both cases show that it is major global health stakeholders and experts in non-endemic countries, rather than transnational pharmaceutical firms, that exert the greatest influence upon these changing representations: PDPs attempt to expand the preexisting biomedical focus on NTDs by means of incorporating "real world" drug development preoccupations (which I term epistemic shifts), but they also combine their stated global humanitarian aim with security concerns about the diseases spreading to non-endemic, industrialized countries (which I term geographical shifts).

Emergent patterns in global health diplomacy: a network analysis of the resolutions adopted by the World Health Assembly from 1948 to 2022

From a complexity perspective on governance, multilateral diplomacy is based on interactions between people, ideas, norms, policies and institutions. This article uses a computer-assisted methodology to better understand governance systems as a network of norms. All World Health Assembly (WHA) resolutions that were available from 1948 to 2022 were collected from the WHO Institutional Repository for Information Sharing (IRIS) database. Regular expressions were used to identify how resolutions cite other resolutions and the resulting relationships were analysed as a normative network. The findings show that WHA resolutions constitute a complex network of interconnected global health issues. This network is characterised by several community patterns. While chain-like patterns are associated with specific diseases programmes, radial patterns are characteristic of highly important procedural decisions that member states reaffirm in similar situations. Finally, densely connected communities correspond to contested topics and emergencies. While these emergeng patterns suggest the relevance of using network analysis to understand global health norms in international organisations, we reflect on how this computational approach can be extended to provide new understandings of how multilateral governance systems work, and to address some important contemporary questions about the effects of regime complexity on global health diplomacy.

The WHO's 75th anniversary: WHO at a pivotal moment in history

The World Health Organisation (WHO) was inaugurated in 1948 to bring the world together to ensure the highest attainable standard of health for all. Establishing health governance under the United Nations (UN), WHO was seen as the preeminent leader in public health, promoting a healthier world following the destruction of World War II and ensuring global solidarity to prevent disease and promote health. Its constitutional function would be 'to act as the directing and coordinating authority on international health work'. Yet today, as the world commemorates WHO's 75th anniversary, it faces a historic global health crisis, with governments presenting challenges to its institutional legitimacy and authority amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. WHO governance in the coming years will define the future of the Organisation and, crucially, the health and well-being of billions of people across the globe. At this pivotal moment, WHO must learn critical lessons from its past and make fundamental reforms to become the Organisation it was meant to be. We propose reforms in WHO financing, governance, norms, human rights and equity that will lay a foundation for the next generation of global governance for health.

Health for all? Pasts, presents and futures of aspirations for universal healthcare

In this special issue, we bring together anthropological and historical work that considers successive aspirations towards 'health for all': their pasts, their futures, and their diverse meanings and iterations. Across the world, hopes for providing 'health for all' were central to nation building in the long 20th century, and for international relations, particularly after the second world war and the establishment of the WHO. Health became seen as a fundamental good by citizens of North and South and has remained a central force shaping global and national politics until today. But what does 'health for all' actually mean, and how did it come to matter? In this introduction we approach 'health for all as a situated, multi-faceted phenomenon, that - while having a shared aspiration towards universality of access and equality of care - comes into focus in partial, diverse and contentious policies, programmes, projects and practices. Beyond homogenising narratives that frame 'health for all' in terms of either success or failure, the special issue highlights the diverse iterations that 'health for all' has taken on the ground for different subjects and groups of people, exploring exclusions and limitations as well as dreams and aspirations.

On the genealogy of the global health justice movement

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is clear that the struggle for global health justice must be our highest priority. To understand the challenges that such a priority faces, we must recognise that this struggle has a long history, and to analyse current challenges within this historical perspective. This commentary explores the gradual construction of the global health justice movement during different historical periods (tropical/colonial medicine, international health, and global health) in the history of approaches to health worldwide. It examines the changing relationship between the political economy of capitalism, colonialism, and racism. It analyses attempts to confront injustice through both human rights and social justice movements in seeking to address stigma and discrimination as well as poverty and social exclusion. It highlights emerging battlegrounds such as access to medical treatments and healthcare services as well as the ways in which private interests continue to undercut such efforts. But it also points to windows of opportunity for defending principles such as solidarity and social inclusion, for building advocacy/analysis alliances and toolkits to inform social movements, and possibilities to reconstruct global health 'governance' mechanisms and institutions in accord with the most basic principles of health justice.

COVAX and the rise of the 'super public private partnership' for global health

COVAX, the vaccines pillar of the Access to Covid-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A), has been promoted as 'the only global solution' to vaccine equity and ending the Covid-19 pandemic. ACT-A and COVAX build on the public-private partnership (PPP) model that dominates global health governance, but take it to a new level, constituting an experimental form that we call the 'super-PPP'. Based on an analysis of COVAX's governance structure and its difficulties in achieving its aims, we identify several features of the super-PPP model. First, it aims to coordinate the fragmented global health field by bringing together existing PPPs in an extraordinarily complex Russian Matryoshka doll-like structure. Second, it attempts to scale up a governance model designed for donor-dependent countries to tackle a health crisis affecting the entire world, pitting it against the self-interest of its wealthiest government partners. Third, the super-PPP's structural complexity obscures the vast differences between constituent partners, giving pharmaceutical corporations substantial power and making public representation, transparency, and accountability elusive. As a super-PPP, COVAX reproduces and amplifies challenges associated with the established PPPs it incorporates. COVAX's limited success has sparked a crisis of legitimacy for the voluntary, charity-based partnership model in global health, raising questions about its future.

Rethinking global health from south and north: A social medicine approach to global health education

This study examines efforts to integrate social medicine into global health education and its potential to guide the new practice of structural competency. The methods employ participant observation and interviews with program coordinators and participants in a social medicine course. Areas of success included: pedagogical innovation, conscientizing course participants, decentralising global health practice, and promoting reflexivity. Accompanying these successes were points of friction, including: inequities in personal risk and mobility limitations among course participants, as well as complexities and nuances in unintentionally reproducing hierarchies of knowledge. Specifically, further recommendations from our research include: (1) incorporating innovative pedagogical approaches, which highlight social medicine practices outside the global north, prioritising opportunities for cross-collaboration among practitioners from the global south; (2) framing social theory as a bidirectional flow: global south traditions must be included in teaching social theory; (3) practising structural humility by highlighting the perspectives and expertise of communities experiencing social and structural marginalisation, while including strategies in organising and direct pathways to political engagement. These conclusions highlight how social medicine-based training can both build from and move beyond the competencies explicitly specified by the structural competency model to create a global health practice inclusive of diverse thought from around the world.

Introduction: Human rights and global health special issue

The emergence of the field of health and human rights during the closing decades of the twentieth century offered the promise of an important shift of perspective within global health. It has been increasingly questioned, however, to what extent the health and human rights framework has indeed succeeded in ushering in a new era of global health governance and justice, as the topic has remained marginalised, marked by regional inequalities, and often dominated by legalist visions and global North perspectives. The articles and commentaries in this special issue seek to create a space where a number of other perspectives and voices can be part of the discussion. They add new perspectives and offer roadmaps for how to rewire the ways in which knowledge is constructed and relationships are formed in the field of health and human rights. In doing so, they present important possibilities for how to build a more just and egalitarian field.

The cognitive dissonance discourse of evolving terminology from colonial medicine to global health and inaction towards equity - A Preventive Medicine Golden Jubilee Article

We discuss the evolution of terminology, beginning with colonial medicine and ending with global health. We describe how global health's definition evolved to include language on autonomy, power, and health equity. Specifically, we studied the websites of the twenty-five‑leading national (N = 5), multilateral (N = 5), philanthropic (N = 5), non-governmental organizations (N = 5) in research, health service delivery, and advocacy, and academic institutions (N = 5) within global health to understand their history, places of critical operations, budget, organizational structure, leadership, mission, policies, and representation of the global south. These illustrative examples showed organizational structures and bureaucratic processes persisting unchanged as linguistic changes on equity occurred. We posit that within this global health framework of equity, non-convergence of language purporting global health equity with static praxis is damaging on many levels. We underscore that the epistemological-praxis disconnect creates organizational psychology akin to cognitive dissonance within individuals, particularly among practitioners from the global south. This dissonance perpetuates inequity across global health organizations uniquely structurally impedes decolonization by and in the institutions that promote global health, and undermines the achievement of current goals across the global health system. To truly decolonize global health, researchers must measure and study changes in how organizations operationalize their goals, structures, policies, and administrative processes to address equity and social justice across all sectors of the global health system.

Psychiatric diagnosis and treatment in the 21st century: paradigm shifts versus incremental integration

Psychiatry has always been characterized by a range of different models of and approaches to mental disorder, which have sometimes brought progress in clinical practice, but have often also been accompanied by critique from within and without the field. Psychiatric nosology has been a particular focus of debate in recent decades; successive editions of the DSM and ICD have strongly influenced both psychiatric practice and research, but have also led to assertions that psychiatry is in crisis, and to advocacy for entirely new paradigms for diagnosis and assessment. When thinking about etiology, many researchers currently refer to a biopsychosocial model, but this approach has received significant critique, being considered by some observers overly eclectic and vague. Despite the development of a range of evidence-based pharmacotherapies and psychotherapies, current evidence points to both a treatment gap and a research-practice gap in mental health. In this paper, after considering current clinical practice, we discuss some proposed novel perspectives that have recently achieved particular prominence and may significantly impact psychiatric practice and research in the future: clinical neuroscience and personalized pharmacotherapy; novel statistical approaches to psychiatric nosology, assessment and research; deinstitutionalization and community mental health care; the scale-up of evidence-based psychotherapy; digital phenotyping and digital therapies; and global mental health and task-sharing approaches. We consider the extent to which proposed transitions from current practices to novel approaches reflect hype or hope. Our review indicates that each of the novel perspectives contributes important insights that allow hope for the future, but also that each provides only a partial view, and that any promise of a paradigm shift for the field is not well grounded. We conclude that there have been crucial advances in psychiatric diagnosis and treatment in recent decades; that, despite this important progress, there is considerable need for further improvements in assessment and intervention; and that such improvements will likely not be achieved by any specific paradigm shifts in psychiatric practice and research, but rather by incremental progress and iterative integration.

Introduction to the special section: Histories of Global Health in Africa

Global health is a multidisciplinary field, yet rarely productively incorporates historical knowledge. Local historical processes, interactions with past biomedical campaigns, and dynamic ecological narratives shape how disease outbreaks, health crises, and international interventions are received and remembered. The residues and afterlives of past interactions influence contemporary understandings. We argue for a broadening of the types of knowledge that are integrated into global health research, interventions, and policymaking by paying attention to project afterlives and better integrating forms of vernacular knowledge. Recognizing, understanding, respecting, and incorporating this knowledge is critical to the efficacy of global health-related interventions and the resulting outcomes.

The effect of COVID-19 on public confidence in the World Health Organization: a natural experiment among 40 countries

Background

At a time when a highly contagious pandemic and global political and economic turmoil are intertwined, worldwide cooperation under the leadership of an international organization has become increasingly important. This study aimed to estimate the effect of COVID-19 on public confidence in the World Health Organization (WHO), which will serve as a reference for other international organizations regarding the maintenance of their credibility in crisis management and ability to play a greater role in global health governance.

Methods

We obtained individual data from the World Values Survey (WVS). A total of 44,775 participants aged 16 and older from 40 countries in six WHO regions were included in this study. The COVID-19 pandemic was used as a natural experiment. We obtained difference-in-differences (DID) estimates of the pandemic’s effects by exploiting temporal variation in the timing of COVID-19 exposure across participants interviewed from 2017 to 2020 together with the geographical variation in COVID-19 severity at the country level. Public confidence in the WHO was self-reported by the respondents.

Results

Among the participants, 28,087 (62.73%) reported having confidence in the WHO. The DID estimates showed that the COVID-19 pandemic could significantly decrease the likelihood of people reporting confidence in the WHO after controlling for multiple covariates (adjusted OR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.49–0.61), especially during the global outbreak (0.35, 0.24–0.50). The effect was found in both younger individuals (0.58, 0.51–0.66) and older adults (0.49, 0.38–0.63) and in both males (0.47, 0.40–0.55) and females (0.62, 0.53–0.72), with a vulnerability in males (adjusted P for interaction = 0.008).

Conclusion

Our findings are relevant regarding the impact of COVID-19 on people’s beliefs about social institutions of global standing, highlighting the need for the WHO and other international organizations to shoulder the responsibility of global development for the establishment and maintenance of public credibility in the face of emergencies, as well as the prevention of confidence crises.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12992-022-00872-y.

A Scoping Review of Internationalization of Dental Education—Identifying Formats and Motivations in Dental Education

Background

Internationalization efforts, including global health activities, in dental education can play an important role in preparing future oral healthcare professionals. To date, in the available literature, there is no common understanding of what internationalization of dental education might mean, and there are no agreed upon standards relating to, or a common definition of the term internationalization of dental education. Here, the authors investigate what has been published in the above area from 01/01/2000 to 12/31/2020, identifying perceived motivations and formats. A proposed definition and connection to the field of international higher education is provided.

Methods

A scoping review of published literature was performed and identified 47 relevant articles. The articles were thematically sorted based on educational formats and concepts (previously established in international higher education) and motivations.

Results

Despite the paucity of articles directly addressing internationalization of dental education, there was a large variety of articles on topics that were identified to correlate with international higher education, ranging from international partnerships, student mobility, and language, to international curriculum at home—with different perceived motivations, including competition, international understanding, and social transformation.

Discussion

More research on internationalization of dental education is needed to provide guidelines and formalize standards for international educational goals to better align formats and motivations for international efforts in dental education.

Parasites and priorities: the early evolution of 'neglected disease' initiatives and the history of a global health agenda

This article explores the development and evolution of 'neglected tropical diseases' (NTDs) as an operative and imaginative category in global public health, focusing on the early intellectual and institutional development of the category in the 1970s. It examines early work around 'neglected' diseases in the Rockefeller Foundation's Health Sciences Division, specifically the Foundation's 'Great Neglected Diseases of Mankind' initiative that ran between 1978 and 1988, as well as intersections with the WHO's parallel Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases and efforts by the US-based Edna McConnell Clark and MacArthur Foundations. A key concern of advocates who influenced initial programmes focused around 'neglect' was a lack of sophistication in medical parasitological research globally. Central to the NTDs' capacity to animate diverse energies were claims about parasitic diseases and their place in new biotechnological approaches to medicine. This article explores how the emphasis on 'neglected', 'tropical' or even 'endemic' diseases encoded specific concerns and desires of parasitologists in the early 1970s. Despite the desire to prioritise the needs of 'endemic' countries and the recognition of a widening cohort of experts from both high-income and low-income nations, NTD advocates often recapitulated historic power dynamics privileging research institutions in the USA and Europe. Historicising and contextualising 'neglect' illuminates the contingent and changing politics of global health in a formative period in the late twentieth century.

Reframing the environment in data-intensive health sciences

In this paper, we analyse the relation between the use of environmental data in contemporary health sciences and related conceptualisations and operationalisations of the notion of environment. We consider three case studies that exemplify a different selection of environmental data and mode of data integration in data-intensive epidemiology. We argue that the diversification of data sources, their increase in scale and scope, and the application of novel analytic tools have brought about three significant conceptual shifts. First, we discuss the EXPOsOMICS project, an attempt to integrate genomic and environmental data which suggests a reframing of the boundaries between external and internal environments. Second, we explore the MEDMI platform, whose efforts to combine health, environmental and climate data instantiate a reframing and expansion of environmental exposure. Third, we illustrate how extracting epidemiological insights from extensive social data collected by the CIDACS institute yields innovative attributions of causal power to environmental factors. Identifying these shifts highlights the benefits and opportunities of new environmental data, as well as the challenges that such tools bring to understanding and fostering health. It also emphasises the constraints that data selection and accessibility pose to scientific imagination, including how researchers frame key concepts in health-related research.

Radiation Risk in Cold War Mexico: Local and Global Networks

After WWII, global concerns about the uses of nuclear energy and radiation sources in agriculture, medicine, and industry brought about calls for radiation protection. At the beginning of the 1960s radiation protection involved the identification and measurement of all sources of radiation to which a population was exposed, and the evaluation and assessment of populations in terms of the biological hazard their exposure posed. Mexico was not an exception to this international trend. This paper goes back to the origins of the first studies on the effects of radiation and on radioprotective compounds in the Genetics and Radiobiology Program of the National Commission of Nuclear Energy founded in 1960, at a time when the effects of radiation on living beings and radiation protection demanded the attention of highly localized groups of scientists and the creation of international as well as national institutions, and its connection to dosimetry and radiation protection until the 1990s. This historical reconstruction examines the circulation of knowledge, scientists, and their material and cognitive resources, to show that radiobiology, with dosimetry and radiation protection as cases in point, not only were carried out with high international standards in parallel with international agencies, but also reflected local material needs, including the standardization of new experimental techniques.

Internationalization of Medical Education - Motivations and Formats of Current Practices

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the importance for medical professionals to engage in work transcending national borders and to deeply understand perspectives of health in other countries. Internationalization of medical education can play a key role to that end, by preparing culturally competent and globally conscious medical healthcare professionals.The aim of this scoping review is to identify current practices and formats in internationalization in medical education, which to date has received sparse academic attention. The need for this review is heightened amid COVID-19 where a clearer understanding of current internationalization efforts can inform more effective practice. We also explore if the motivations driving internationalization activities in medicine align with current practice and formats based on a framework of thematic categories found in the field of international higher education. In addition, we identify gaps in existing research.

Methods

Using a scoping review, an international and interdisciplinary research team employed a comprehensive search strategy to identify publications on existing efforts in IoME, published from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2020, in Scopus, PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied to identify relevant data from publication titles, abstracts, and main texts, which were subsequently summarized. Coding schemes were developed based on models for comprehensive internationalization in higher education.

Results

350 articles met the inclusion criteria. Most articles originated from the high-income countries of the Global North and accounted for a literature base favoring perspectives and understandings that were typically representative of this region. Whereas motivations for internationalizing medical curricula in high-income countries were generally rooted in a model of social transformation/justice/health equity, drivers relating to competition and workforce preparation were common in the low- and middle-income countries.Importantly, the motivations driving internationalization activities generally did not align well with reported internationalization formats, which included student mobility, international curricula at home, and global partnerships. There was a disconnect between what medical curricula/professionals hope to accomplish and the reality of practice on the ground.

Discussion and Conclusion

There is a need for a common definition of internationalization of medical education and a more balanced and unbiased literature base, capturing the full spectrum of internationalization activities existing in both the Global North and South. International partnership frameworks need to equally benefit institutions of both the Global North and Global South. Currently, institutions in the low- and middle-income countries generally cater to the needs and interests of their high-income counterparts. There are concerns about student mobility from high-income countries to low- and middle-income countries. Finally, medical education should be more inclusive and all medical students should gain access to international perspectives and experiences.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-022-01553-6.

Global health wars: a rhetorical review of global health critique

The critique of global health is a longstanding tradition in the global health humanities (GHH). Typically, this critique takes an expected tack: critics take a slice of global health, identify its rhetoric, expose its power, and elucidate its unanticipated consequences. Here, I subject global health critique to its own approach-conducting a 'rhetorical review' of global health critique in order to ascertain whether it has rhetoric, power and unanticipated consequences of its own. Following this review, I find that global health critique has a rhetoric, and that this rhetoric can be organised into three types: (1) 'global health as mere rhetoric', (2) 'splitting global health', and (3) 'figuring global health war.' Ultimately, I argue that the rhetoric of GHH critique, like the rhetoric of global health, is a rhetoric of consequence-and a rhetoric worth revisiting.

Power Across the Global Health Landscape: A Network Analysis of Development Assistance 1990-2015

Power distribution across the global health landscape has undergone a fundamental shift over the past three decades. What was once a system comprised largely of bilateral and multilateral institutional arrangements between nation-states evolved into a varied landscape where these traditional actors were joined by a vast assemblage of private firms, philanthropies, non-governmental organizations, public-private partnerships. Financial resources are an explicit power source within global health which direct how, where, and to whom health interventions are delivered, which health issues are (de)prioritised, how and by whom evidence to support policies and interventions is developed, and how we account for progress. Financial resource allocations are not isolated decisions, but rather outputs of negotiation processes and dynamics between actors who derive power from a multiplicity of sources. The aims of this paper are to examine the changes in the global health actor landscape and the shifts in power using data on disbursements of development assistance for health (DAH). A typology of actors was developed from previous literature and refined through an empirical analysis of DAH. The emergent network structure of DAH flows between global health actors and positionality of actors within the network were analysed between 1990 and 2015. The results reflect the dramatic shift in the numbers of actors, relationships between actors, and funding dispersal over this time period. Through a combination of the massive influx of new funding sources and a decrease in public spending, the majority control of financial resources in the DAH network receded from public entities to a vast array of civil society organisations (CSOs) and public-private partnerships (PPPs). The most prominent of these were the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) and the Global Fund for AIDS, TB, and Malaria (GFATM), which rose to the third and fourth most central positions within the DAH network by 2015.

Polio health economics: assessing the benefits and costs of polio, non-polio, and integrated activities of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative

Background: Investments made by countries and donors to support polio eradication and the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) over the past 35 years provided financial support for significant health interventions beyond the prevention of polio. Prior economic analyses that sought to quantify the economic benefits of some interventions encountered insufficient data and evidence associated with non-polio-specific activities. The 2022-2026 GPEI Strategic Plan explicitly identified integration and gender equity as funded mandates that must move forward in parallel with polio eradication, but these goals remain vaguely defined from a health economic perspective. Methods: To ensure unambiguous and full accounting for all financial investments in the GPEI, polio eradication, and other desirable objectives, we identify the health economic analysis methods and inputs needed to ensure transparent financial accountability and cost-effective use of funds. Results: Sufficient inputs and methods exist to characterize the health and economic benefits of polio-specific activities, but we identified the need for additional information and method development for some non-polio-specific and cost-sharing activities. Donors who seek to support non-polio-specific objectives as part of the GPEI may want to provide dedicated support financing for which it may be difficult to apply typical health economic criteria and to expect net health and/or net economic benefits. Conclusions: Given the mixture of funding sources provided to the GPEI, which includes support by governments and private donors, we recommend that the GPEI separately account for financial needs that represent necessities for polio eradication from those used for other stated objectives. An added layer of specificity that identifies all funds according to each activity, the accountable party and/or parties, and the associated measurable health or other outcome(s), will enable improved health economic analyses and reporting to donors who seek to track returns on their investments.

Interrogating the World Bank's role in global health knowledge production, governance, and finance

Background

In the nearly half century since it began lending for population projects, the World Bank has become one of the largest financiers of global health projects and programs, a powerful voice in shaping health agendas in global governance spaces, and a mass producer of evidentiary knowledge for its preferred global health interventions. How can social scientists interrogate the role of the World Bank in shaping ‘global health’ in the current era?

Main body

As a group of historians, social scientists, and public health officials with experience studying the effects of the institution’s investment in health, we identify three challenges to this research. First, a future research agenda requires recognizing that the Bank is not a monolith, but rather has distinct inter-organizational groups that have shaped investment and discourse in complicated, and sometimes contradictory, ways. Second, we must consider how its influence on health policy and investment has changed significantly over time. Third, we must analyze its modes of engagement with other institutions within the global health landscape, and with the private sector. The unique relationships between Bank entities and countries that shape health policy, and the Bank’s position as a center of research, permit it to have a formative influence on health economics as applied to international development. Addressing these challenges, we propose a future research agenda for the Bank’s influence on global health through three overlapping objects of and domains for study: knowledge-based (shaping health policy knowledge), governance-based (shaping health governance), and finance-based (shaping health financing). We provide a review of case studies in each of these categories to inform this research agenda.

Conclusions

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to rage, and as state and non-state actors work to build more inclusive and robust health systems around the world, it is more important than ever to consider how to best document and analyze the impacts of Bank’s financial and technical investments in the Global South.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12992-021-00761-w.

The anthropology of health systems: A history and review

Ethnographies of health systems are a theoretically rich and rapidly growing area within medical anthropology. Critical ethnographic work dating back to the 1950s has taken policymakers and health staff as points of entry into the power structures that run through the global health enterprise. In the last decade, there has been a surge of ethnographic work on health systems. We conceptualize the anthropology of health systems as a field; review the history of this body of knowledge; and outline emergent literatures on policymaking, HIV, hospitals, Community Health Workers, health markets, pharmaceuticals, and metrics. High-quality ethnographic work is an excellent way to understand the complex systems that shape health outcomes, and provides a critical vantage point for thinking about global health policy and systems. As theory in this space develops and deepens, we argue that anthropologists should look beyond the discipline to think through what their work does and why it matters.

Training Curriculum, Skills, and Competencies for Global Health Leaders: Good Practices and Lessons Learned

Objectives:

This paper aims to depict unique perspectives and to compare and contrast three leadership programs for global health in order to enable other training institutions to design impactful curricula.

Methods:

We purposively selected three global health training programs. We used a six-step curriculum development framework to systematically compare the curriculum process across programs and to identify best practices and factors contributing to the impact of each of these programs.

Findings:

All three fellowship programs undertook an intentional and in-depth approach to curriculum development. Each identified competencies related to leadership and technical skills. Each defined goals, though the goals differed to align with the desired impact of the program, ranging from improving the impact of HIV programming, supporting stronger global health program implementation, and supporting the next generation of global health leaders. All programs implemented the curriculum through an onboarding phase, a delivery of core content in different formats, and a wrap-up or endline phase. During implementation, each program also utilized networking and mentoring to enhance connections and to support application of learning in work roles. Programs faced overlapping challenges and opportunities including funding, strengthening partnerships, and finding ways to engage and support alumni.

Conclusions:

Local ownership of programs is critical, including tailoring curricula to the needs of specific contexts. Strong partnerships and resources are needed to ensure program sustainability and impact.

Key Takeaways

What is considered as global health scholarship? A meta-knowledge analysis of global health journals and definitions

Despite the rapid growth of the global health field over the past few decades, consensus on what qualifies as global health scholarship or practice remains elusive. We conducted a meta-knowledge analysis of the titles and abstracts of articles published in 25 journals labelled as global health journals between 2001 and 2019. We identified the major topics in these journals by creating clusters based on terms co-occurrence over time. We also conducted a review of global health definitions during the same period.

The analysis included 16 413 articles. The number of journals, labelled as global health, and articles published in these journals, increased dramatically during the study period. The majority of global health publications focused on topics prevalent in low-resource settings. Governance, infectious diseases, and maternal and child health were major topics throughout the analysis period. Surveillance and disease outcomes appeared during the 2006–2010 epoch and continued, with increasing complexity, until the 2016–2019 epoch. Malaria, sexual and reproductive health, and research methodology appeared for only one epoch as major topics. We included 11 relevant definitions in this analysis. Definitions of global health were not aligned with the major topics identified in the analysis of articles published in global health journals.

These results highlight a lack of alignment between what is published as global health scholarship and global health definitions, which often advocate taking a global perspective to population health. Our analysis suggests that global health has not truly moved beyond its predecessor, international health. There is a need to define the parameters of the discipline and investigate the disconnect between what is published in global health versus how the field is defined.

Engaging globally with how to achieve healthy societies: insights from India, Latin America and East and Southern Africa

The way healthy societies are conceptualised shapes efforts to achieve them. This paper explores the features and drivers of frameworks for healthy societies that had wide or sustained policy influence post-1978 at global level and as purposively selected southern regions, in India, Latin America and East and Southern Africa. A thematic analysis of 150 online documents identified paradigms and themes. The findings were discussed with expertise from the regions covered to review and validate the findings.

Globally, comprehensive primary healthcare, whole-of-government and rights-based approaches have focused on social determinants and social agency to improve health as a basis for development. Biomedical, selective and disease-focused technology-driven approaches have, however, generally dominated, positioning health improvements as a result of macroeconomic growth. Traditional approaches in the three southern regions previously mentioned integrated reciprocity and harmony with nature. They were suppressed by biomedical, allopathic models during colonialism and by postcolonial neoliberal economic reforms promoting selective, biomedical interventions for highest-burden diseases, with weak investment in public health. In all three regions, holistic, sociocultural models and claims over natural resources re-emerged. In the 2000s, economic, ecological, pandemic crises and social inequality have intensified alliances and demand to address global, commercial processes undermining healthy societies, with widening differences between ‘planetary health’, integrating ecosystems and collective interests, and the coercive controls and protectionism in technology-driven and biosecurity-driven approaches.

The trajectories point to a need for ideas and practice on healthy societies to tackle systemic determinants of inequities within and across countries, including to reclaim suppressed cultures; to build transdisciplinary, reflexive and participatory forms of knowledge that are embedded in and learn from action; and to invest in a more equitable circulation of ideas between regions in framing global ideas. Today’s threats raise a critical moment of choice on which ideas dominate, not only for health but also for survival.

Limits of neoliberalism: HIV, COVID-19, and the importance of healthcare systems in Malawi

Countries in sub-Saharan Africa have been seriously affected by HIV and now face a new pandemic - COVID-19. How have prior experiences with managing HIV prepared countries for COVID-19? To what extent has the structure of the global health field enabled or constrained countries' ability to respond? Drawing on qualitative methods, this article examines the impact of HIV interventions on the healthcare system in Malawi and its implications for addressing COVID-19. I argue that the historical and continued influence of neoliberalism in global health manifests in the structures and routines of clinical practice. In Malawi's health centres, a parallel NGO system of care has become grafted onto state healthcare, with NGOs managing HIV commodities and providing care to HIV patients. While HIV NGOs do support the work of government providers, it is limited to tasks that align with their programmatic goals. Outside of donor priorities, the conditions of public healthcare are left behind, and government providers struggle with shortages of staff, medical resources, and basic infrastructure. In the context of COVID-19, risks are compounded as public healthcare facilities not only struggle with resources to treat patients, but also become a site of risk itself for COVID-19 infection.

Global health in the making: health demonstration areas in Europe, 1950s and 1960s

Global health is a multifaceted concept that entails the standardization of procedures in healthcare domains in accordance with a doctrine agreed upon by experts. This essay focus on the creation of health demonstration areas by the World Health Organisation (WHO) to establish core nodes for integrated state-of-the-art health services. It explores the origins, theoretical basis and aims of this technique and reviews several European experiences during the first 20 years of the WHO. Particular attention is paid to the historical importance of technical cooperative activities carried out by the WHO in regard to the implementation of health services, a long-term strategic move that contributed to the thematic upsurge of primary health care in the late 1970s.

Unequal discourses: Problems of the current model of world health development

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed institutional deficiencies in world health development. This viewpoint paper examines the allegations about the partiality and political bias of the World Health Organization's (WHO) response to world health emergencies. We draw on quantitative and qualitative analysis of the WHO's Director-General's speeches pertaining to the COVID-19 and EVD outbreaks. We find that the WHO's discourse on COVID-19 praised the Chinese government's role in the containment. By contrast, the WHO's discourse on the African countries fighting to contain Ebola centered on the unpreparedness of these countries. We argue that the WHO's unbalanced emphasis on different practices and "traits" of member states paints a partial picture of global health emergencies, thus it fails to uphold its founding principles of egalitarianism and impartiality. Finally, we put forward suggestions about a more equal and fairer model of world health development.

Structural competency and global health education

Structural competency is a new curricular framework for training health professionals to recognise and respond to disease and its unequal distribution as the outcome of social structures, such as economic and legal systems, healthcare and taxation policies, and international institutions. While extensive global health research has linked social structures to the disproportionate burden of disease in the Global South, formal attempts to incorporate the structural competency framework into US-based global health education have not been described in the literature. This paper fills this gap by articulating five sub-competencies for structurally competent global health instruction. Authors drew on their experiences developing global health and structural competency curricula-and consulted relevant structural competency, global health, social science, social theory, and social determinants of health literatures. The five sub-competencies include: (1) Describe the role of social structures in producing and maintaining health inequities globally, (2) Identify the ways that structural inequalities are naturalised within the field of global health, (3) Discuss the impact of structures on the practice of global health, (4) Recognise structural interventions for addressing global health inequities, and (5) Apply the concept of structural humility in the context of global health.

Internationalization of Medical Education-a Scoping Review of the Current Status in the United States

This article explores the current status of internationalization of medical education in the United States. Dominant themes of articles published from 2000 to 2018 indicate that common formats are institutional partnerships, international learning at home, and student mobility programs. Critical analysis on the basis of internationalization of higher education, recommendations, and future perspective is given.

Global health and rehabilitation education in Canada: a qualitative analysis of experiences and perspectives of educators

BACKGROUND

Rehabilitation practice is increasingly tied to global trends. First, healthcare services are increasingly tailored to be patient-centered, requiring knowledge of sociocultural contexts and experiences of a diverse patient population. Second, non-communicable diseases and morbidity stemming from infectious diseases are creating greater needs for rehabilitation services in countries facing this double burden of disease. Third, globalization continues to shape the risk factors for disease and disability and influences the type of services accessible and the financing and management of such services. Given this context, there is a critical need to examine how global health (GH) is approached in rehabilitation curricula. How students learn about these various dynamics will impact their ability to practice in this environment and best meet the needs of the patients and populations they are caring for.

OBJECTIVES

This study explores how university-level Canadian occupational and physical therapy educators understand GH within their academic and clinical practices.

METHODS

The project followed a qualitative design. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants (n = 12; randomized purposive sampling was used). A deductive and inductive thematic analysis was performed to describe the participants perspectives on and practices of GH education in rehabilitation education programs.

FINDINGS

There was an overall coherence between the literature and the participant's views of the constituent elements of GH. Participants viewed GH as a framework to broaden the clinical training of students by encouraging a critical "clinical toolbox" via themes of structural competency, cultural sensitivity, and a sense of global citizenship and stewardship. However, GH was also described by participants as being implicitly present in the curriculum due to ambiguities regarding the scope of GH, seen as a key obstacle in the integration of GH education in rehabilitation programs.

INTERPRETATION

Despite the growing interest and relevance of GH, there is a noteworthy absence of GH education guidelines. There is a need to uncover the scope and underpinnings of GH and to outline rehabilitation-oriented GH competencies as per the positive value of GH attributed by the educators to the training of our healthcare workforce.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONGlobal health is seen by a sample of educators to provide rehabilitation students with a critical and holistic "clinical toolkit" by introducing themes of structural competency, cultural sensitivity and awareness, and global stewardship, enabling them to become good global clinicians and global citizens;The increased interest in global health throughout academic curricula presents new challenges for educators and students, specifically relating to understanding the mission and aims of this field. There is a need to clarify the notion and field of global health and how it complements clinical training within rehabilitation programs;There is a need to advance the literature on global health in rehabilitation by exploring what competencies are seen to be relevant to the field and practice of rehabilitation.

The role of the World Health Organization country programs in the development of virology in Spain, 1951-1975

Within the framework of recent historiography about the role of the World Health Organization (WHO) in modernizing public health and the multifaceted concept of global health, this study addresses the impact of the WHO's "country programs" in Spain from the time it was admitted to this organization in 1951 to 1975. This research adopts a transnational historical perspective and emphasizes attention to the circulation of health knowledge, practices, and people, and focuses on the Spain-0001 and Spain-0025programs, their role in the development of virology in Spain, and the transformation of public health. Sources include historical archives (WHO, the Spanish National Health School), various WHO publications, the contemporary medical press, and a selection of the Spanish general press.

Systematic analysis of the scientific literature on population surveillance

Introduction

Population surveillance provides data on the health status of the population through continuous scrutiny of different indicators. Identifying risk factors is essential for the quickly detecting and controlling of epidemic outbreaks and reducing the incidence of cross-infections and non-communicable diseases. The objective of the present study is to analyze research on population surveillance, identifying the main topics of interest for investigators in the area.

Methodology

We included documents indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection in the period from 2000 to 2019 and assigned with the generic Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) “population surveillance” or its related terms (“public health surveillance,” “sentinel surveillance” or “biosurveillance”). A co-occurrence analysis was undertaken to identify the document clusters comprising the main research topics. Scientific production, collaboration, and citation patterns in each of the clusters were characterized bibliometrically. We also analyzed research on coronaviruses, relating the results obtained to the management of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

We included 39,184 documents, which reflected a steady growth in scientific output driven by papers on “Public, Environmental & Occupational Health” (21.62% of the documents) and “Infectious Diseases” (10.49%). Research activity was concentrated in North America (36.41%) and Europe (32.09%). The USA led research in the area (40.14% of documents). Ten topic clusters were identified, including “Disease Outbreaks,” which is closely related to two other clusters (“Genetics” and “Influenza”). Other clusters of note were “Cross Infections” as well as one that brought together general public health concepts and topics related to non-communicable diseases (cardiovascular and coronary diseases, mental diseases, diabetes, wound and injuries, stroke, and asthma). The rest of the clusters addressed “Neoplasms,” “HIV,” “Pregnancy,” “Substance Abuse/Obesity,” and “Tuberculosis.” Although research on coronavirus has focused on population surveillance only occasionally, some papers have analyzed and collated guidelines whose relevance to the dissemination and management of the COVID-19 pandemic has become obvious. Topics include tracing the spread of the virus, limiting mass gatherings that would facilitate its propagation, and the imposition of quarantines. There were important differences in the scientific production and citation of different clusters: the documents on mental illnesses, stroke, substance abuse/obesity, and cross-infections had much higher citations than the clusters on disease outbreaks, tuberculosis, and especially coronavirus, where these values are substantially lower.

Conclusions

The role of population surveillance should be strengthened, promoting research and the development of public health surveillance systems in countries whose contribution to the area is limited.