Search

Introduction: Learning objectives (LOs) are a common tool used to define learning goals and guide curricula. As the field of global health has expanded, more rigorous and tailored approaches to effectively teach the next generation of the workforce are needed. The STAR project developed and utilized individualized LOs as the basis for on-the-job learning plans for senior global health leaders from low- and middle-income countries and from the US., Methods: We analyzed basic demographic information and LOs from 36 STAR fellows. Descriptive statistics provided an overview of the STAR fellows, competency areas and planned outputs of their LOs. We utilized qualitative thematic analysis to further explore the LOs themselves., Results: STAR fellows were based in the US and in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The majority had over 10 years of experience and at least one advanced degree. Fellows commonly worked on LOs related to capacity strengthening, communications, and development practice. Capacity strengthening LOs focused on mentorship, decision-making, and technical skills such as data analysis. Communications LOs focused on language skills, dissemination of information, and writing. Development practice LOs included gaining understanding of key stakeholders in global health and building effective partnerships and teams., Discussion: Our experience developing tailored LOs provided deeper understanding of diverse learning needs of global health leaders. While not representative of all global health learners, we captured priorities of senior US- and LMIC-based leaders and identified common themes for learning. Despite the labor required to tailor curricula in this way, more global health education programs can benefit by integrating similar processes., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: In an era of global health security challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic, there is greater need for strong leadership. Over the past decades, significant investments have been made in global health leadership development programs by governments and philanthropic organizations to address this need. Evaluating the societal impact of these programs remains challenging, despite consensus on the importance of public health leadership., Objective: This article identifies the gaps and highlights the critical role of monitoring and evaluation approaches in assessing the impact of global health leadership programs. Importantly, we also propose the theory of change (TOC) as a common framework and identify a set of tools and indicators that leadership programs can adapt and use., Methods: We carried out an informal review of major global health leadership programs, including a literature review on leadership program evaluation approaches. Current practices in assessing the short- to long-term outcomes of leadership training programs were explored and synthesized. We also examined use of program theory frameworks, such as theory of change to guide the evaluation strategy. We find the TOC approach can be enhanced by integrating evaluation-specific frameworks and establishing broad stakeholder buy-in. We highlight measurement challenges, proposed outcome indicators and evaluation methodologies, and outline the future direction for such efforts., Findings: Most evaluation of current leadership programs is focused on short-term individual-level outcomes, while reports on long-term societal impact were limited. Reciprocal impacts on and benefits for the "host" organizations were not included in evaluation metrics. Most programs had program logic or result chains, but with no well-articulated program theories., Conclusion: Key stakeholders involved in leadership training programs benefit from the evidence of rigorous program evaluations to inform decisions that address barriers in fostering global health leadership and improving population health outcomes. Insight into reciprocal change in host organizations is important. Evaluation of global health leadership training must go beyond the individual trainee and encompass organizational and community-level impacts. Documentation of long-lasting organizational and societal impacts is essential for donors to appreciate the return on their investment., Key Takeaways: Evaluation plays an important role in understanding how leadership development takes place and how it contributes to improving public health outcomes.Making the case for investments in leadership development programs requires robust evidence from monitoring and evaluation strategies that link investments beyond the individual-level to longer-term societal impacts.The first critical step towards a strategy for success is for leadership programs to clearly build, articulate, share, and use their program theories or theories of change.Theories of change help identify the pathways (and potential tensions) through which leadership development programs effect change at the individual, organizational and community levels.Evaluation methods that examine outcomes of leadership programs should be multi-method, multi-level, and where possible include counterfactual outcomes.Allocation of funds to evaluate on-going and long-lasting societal impact of leadership programs should be a routine practice., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s).)

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced a new look (or modernization) for both the obligations and approaches to achieve best-practices in global health learning. These best-practices have moved beyond traditional, face-to-face (F2F), classroom-based didactics to the use of innovative online, asynchronous and synchronous instructional design and the information and communication technology (ICT) tools to support it. But moving to this higher level of online in-service and pre-service training, key obligations (e.g., stopping neocolonialization, cultural humility, reversing brain drain, gender equity) must guide the modernization of instructional design and the supporting ICT. To positively impact global health training, educators must meet the needs of learners where they are ., Purpose: We describe a set of multi-communication methods, e-Learning principles, strategies, and ICT approaches for educators to pivot content delivery from traditional, F2F classroom didactics into the modern era. These best-practices in both the obligations and approaches utilize thoughtful, modern strategies of instructional design and ICT., Approach: We harnessed our collective experiences in global health training to present thoughtful insights on the guiding principles, strategies, and ICT environment central to develop learning curricula that meet trainee needs and how they can be actualized. Specifically, we describe five strategies: 1. Individualized learning; 2. Provide experiential learning; 3. Mentor … Mentor … Mentor; 4. Reinforce learning through assessment; and 5. Information and communication technology and tools to support learning., Discussion: We offer a vision, set of guiding principles, and five strategies for successful curricula delivery in the modern era so that global health training can be made available to a wider audience more efficiently and effectively., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s).)

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: Global health competencies and curricula should be linked to local health system needs and contexts where learners are working.Emphasizing both individualistic and collectivist approaches to learning is important in engaging and supporting diverse global health learners.Emphasizing mentorship and opportunities to apply learning in contexts where learners are working is important in order to provide support to learners as they work to integrate what they are learning into their professional roles and activities.Partnerships and resources-including donor support-are essential to implement and sustain robust leadership curricula and to provide opportunities for experiential and didactic learning., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s).)

Background: Global health leadership training seeks to strengthen the existing global health workforce to build leaders that have the necessary knowledge, attitudes, and skills to deliver a vision for public health and healthcare delivery. In order to develop impactful training curricula, there is a greater need to understand the areas of focus required to strengthen the global health workforce., Objectives: This paper seeks to present a critical analysis of the competency gaps among participants of a single global health training program., Methods: This is a cross-sectional observational study conducted during the implementation of the Sustaining Technical and Analytical Resources (STAR) project from May 1, 2018 to May 31, 2020. We utilized descriptive statistics to analyze the baseline competency assessment of STAR participants using a customized framework that was developed for the program., Findings: Among the 74 individuals enrolled in the study, we identified that there were significant differences in milestone achievement across participant types for all eight competencies (p < 0.001). Overall, US-based fellows reported higher perceived competency levels than low- and middle-income (LMIC)-based fellows in all categories except Capacity Strengthening (4, 23.5% leading vs. 12, 63.5% leading). LMIC fellows reported lower achieved milestones in Gender Equity (only 6, 31.5% at practicing) and Development Practice (only 6, 31.5% at practicing)., Conclusions: Our study identified critical needs in the domains of public health ethics, health equity, and social justice and gender equity. Further emphasis on these domains in global health curricula and other professional development is critical to strengthen the knowledge and skills of individuals who are well-placed to advance the development of an equitable global health workforce., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s).)

Background: The learning opportunities for global health professionals have expanded rapidly in recent years. The diverse array of learners and wide range in course quality underscore the need for an improved course vetting process to better match learners with appropriate learning opportunities., Methods: We developed a framework to assess overall course quality by determining performance across four defined domains Relevance, Engagement, Access, and Pedagogy (REAP). We applied this framework across a learning catalogue developed for participants enrolled in the Sustaining Technical and Analytic Resources (STAR) project, a global health leadership training program., Results: The STAR learning activities database included a total of 382 courses, workshops, and web-based resources which fulfilled 531 competencies across three levels: core, content, and skill., Relevance: The majority of activities were at an understanding or practicing level across all competency domains (486/531, 91.5%). Engagement: Many activities lacked any peer engagement (202/531, 38.0%) and had limited to no faculty engagement (260/531, 49.0%). Access: The plurality of courses across competencies were offered on demand (227/531, 42.7%) and were highly flexible in pace (240/531, 45.2%). Pedagogy: Of the activities that included an assessment, most matched activity learning objectives (217/531, 40.9%)., Conclusions: Through applying REAP to the STAR project learning catalogue, we found many online activities lacked meaningful engagement with faculty and peers. Further development of structured online activities providing learners with flexibility in access, a range of levels of advancement for content, and opportunities to engage and apply learning are needed for the field of global health.

Background: As the field of global health expands, the recognition of structured training for field-based public health professionals has grown. Substantial effort has gone towards defining competency domains for public health professionals working globally. However, there is limited literature on how to implement competency-based training into learning curricula and evaluation strategies., Objectives: This scoping review seeks to collate the current status, degree of consensus, and best practices, as well as gaps and areas of divergence, related to the implementation of competencies in global health curricula. Specifically, we sought to examine (i) the target audience, (ii) the levels or milestones, and (iii) the pedagogy and assessment approaches., Sources of Evidence: A review of the published and grey literature was completed to identify published and grey literature sources that presented information on how to implement or support global health and public health competency-based education programs. In particular, we sought to capture any attempts to assign levels or milestones, any evaluation strategies, and the different pedagogical approaches., Results: Out of 68 documents reviewed, 21 documents were included which contained data related to the implementation of competency-based training programs; of these, 18 were peer-reviewed and three were from the grey literature. Most of the sources focused on post-graduate public health students, professional trainees pursuing continuing education training, and clinical and allied health professionals working in global health. Two approaches were identified to defining skill level or milestones, namely: (i) defining levels of increasing ability or (ii) changing roles across career stages. Pedagogical approaches featured field experience, direct engagement, group work, and self-reflection. Assessment approaches included self-assessment surveys, evaluations by peers and supervisors, and mixed methods assessments., Conclusions: The implementation of global health competencies needs to respond to the needs of specific agencies or particular groups of learners. A milestones approach may aide these efforts while also support monitoring and evaluation. Further development is needed to understand how to assess competencies in a consistent and relevant manner., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Global health trainees rely on immersive experiences to apply their classroom knowledge in real-world settings. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic travel has come to a halt and short-term experiences are no longer available in their current form. As with didactic material, global health programs have an opportunity to innovate the delivery of applied learning, providing trainees with robust, mentored experiences that promote the acquisition of core global health competencies. We provide a series of practical solutions for remote applied learning including case-based learning, pathfinder pedagogy, virtual reality simulations, and twinning. We further describe the role of these approaches in addressing common criticisms of short-term experiences and their potential for creating new win-win dynamics between institutions and trainees., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s).)

Background: Global health education has rapidly expanded in popularity, and many programs require applied practical experiences. Applied experiences are critical for global health training. Often a trainee from a high-income country travels to work with collaborators and partners in a low- or middle-income country. These experiences exist within partnerships between individuals and institutions that have varying objectives, including research, program implementation, or education. Attention is growing to ensure equity in these relationships in ways that are informed by the voices of collaborators and partners., Objectives: Understanding the experiences of LMIC collaborators in academic global health partnerships is essential. Our research aimed to capture views of our partners about factors impacting equitable global health partnerships., Methods: We conducted a small survey among global health collaborators and partners who host students on these experiences. Respondents were asked to rank enablers and barriers to equitable partnerships in priority order. Results were stratified by institutional affiliation and role., Results: Funding, time, engagement, and mutual opportunities for training are common enablers and barriers of global health partnerships. There were slight differences across different professional roles. Other reported factors that impact partnerships included language barriers, visa concerns, and identifying opportunities for collaboration., Conclusions: Our work highlights several barriers and enablers faced by partners that align with those reported across the global health education community. Equitable partnerships are possible and require substantial input at individual, interpersonal, and institutional levels. We reflect on two strategies to encourage partnership equity employed within our own work and discuss how these strategies can be applied more broadly., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright: © 2019 The Author(s).)

Background: There has been an exponential increase in the offering of short-term international field experiences in recent years in response to student demands for global health opportunities. Pre-departure preparation is an essential component to equip trainees with the adequate safety, wellness, and cultural competence needed to engage in a meaningful and mutually beneficial elective. This review seeks to quantify the plethora of pre-departure preparation training available to public health, clinical, and undergraduate trainees across the continuum of education for short-term experiences in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs)., Methods: We performed a systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Ovid Global Health in February, 2018. A three-concept search was employed and included "global or international health"; "education or preparation of personnel/students"; and "field programs or travel." The study teamed used PRISMA reporting guidelines to conduct title and full-text reviews and conduct data extraction and analysis., Results: The search returned 2506 unique articles. Of these, 55 met inclusion criteria and were included in the final review. Ninety one percent (91%) of articles focused on pre-departure trainings for medical students and residents. Nine thematic domains for short-term international field experiences emerged; culture, safety, and project-specific knowledge were the most frequently covered domains while mentorship, professionalism, and emotional wellness and culture shock were least common. Approximately half (53.3%) of studies specifically evaluated the pre-departure component of the international experience using a survey or evaluation form. Recommendations emerged from these evaluations including early engagement with international partners, inclusion of self-reflection exercises and site-specific content, and utilization of interactive approaches in learning. Some institutions face barriers to conducting pre-departure preparation such as lack of dedicated faculty, finances, and institutional support., Conclusions: Interest in pre-departure training for international experiences is growing but few programs conduct and publish evaluations of these trainings. Pre-departure trainings should be developed in partnership with receiving institutions and faculty and incorporate critical self- reflection throughout the experience. In addition to the experience itself, institutions need to evaluate these curricula to better understand how they influence trainees' capacity to effectively engage in LMIC settings.

Mentoring is beneficial to mentors, mentees, and their institutions, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), that are faced with complex disease burdens, skills shortages, and resource constraints. Mentoring in global health research can be enhanced by defining key competencies, to enable the skill set required for effective mentoring, determine training needs for local research mentors, and facilitate institutional capacity building to support mentors. The latter includes advocating for resources, institutional development of mentoring guidelines, and financial and administrative support for mentoring. Nine core global health research mentoring competencies were identified: maintaining effective communication; aligning expectations with reasonable goals and objectives; assessing and providing skills and knowledge for success; addressing diversity; fostering independence; promoting professional development; promoting professional integrity and ethical conduct; overcoming resource limitations; and fostering institutional change. The competencies described in this article will assist mentors to sharpen their cognitive skills, acquire or generate new knowledge, and enhance professional and personal growth and job satisfaction. Similarly, the proposed competencies will enhance the knowledge and skills of mentees, who can continue and extend the work of their mentors, and advance knowledge for the benefit of the health of populations in LMICs.

Capacity building in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) institutions hinges on the delivery of effective mentorship. This study presents an overview of mentorship toolkits applicable to LMIC institutions identified through a scoping review. A scoping review approach was used to 1) map the extent, range, and nature of mentorship resources and tools available and 2) to identify knowledge gaps in the current literature. To identify toolkits, we collected and analyzed data provided online that met the following criteria: written in English and from organizations and individuals involved in global health mentoring. We searched electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, and Google search engine. Once toolkits were identified, we extracted the available tools and mapped them to pre-identified global health competencies. Only three of the 18 identified toolkits were developed specifically for the LMIC context. Most toolkits focused on individual mentor-mentee relationships. Most focused on the domains of communication and professional development. Fewer toolkits focused on ethics, overcoming resource limitations, and fostering institutional change. No toolkits discussed strategies for group mentoring or how to adapt existing tools to a local context. There is a paucity of mentoring resources specifically designed for LMIC settings. We identified several toolkits that focus on aspects of individual mentor-mentee relationships that could be adapted to local contexts. Future work should focus on adaptation and the development of tools to support institutional change and capacity building for mentoring.

Objectives: The Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) conducts an annual search of peer-reviewed and gray literature relevant to global emergency medicine (EM) to identify, review, and disseminate the most important new research in this field to a global audience of academics and clinical practitioners., Methods: This year 13,890 articles written in four languages were identified by our search. These articles were distributed among 20 reviewers for initial screening based on their relevance to the field of global EM. An additional two reviewers searched the gray literature. All articles that were deemed appropriate by at least one reviewer and approved by their editor underwent formal scoring of overall quality and importance. Two independent reviewers scored all articles., Results: A total of 716 articles met our inclusion criteria and underwent full review. Fifty-nine percent were categorized as emergency care in resource-limited settings, 17% as EM development, and 24% as disaster and humanitarian response. Nineteen articles received scores of 18.5 or higher out of a maximum score of 20 and were selected for formal summary and critique. Inter-rater reliability testing between reviewers revealed Cohen's kappa of 0.441., Conclusions: In 2016, the total number of articles identified by our search continued to increase. The proportion of articles in each of the three categories remained stable. Studies and reviews with a focus on infectious diseases, pediatrics, and the use of ultrasound in resource-limited settings represented the majority of articles selected for final review., (© 2017 The Authors. Academic Emergency Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM).)

Objectives: Despite recent strides in the development of global emergency medicine (EM), the field continues to lag in applying a scientific approach to identifying critical knowledge gaps and advancing evidence-based solutions to clinical and public health problems seen in emergency departments (EDs) worldwide. Here, progress on the global EM research agenda created at the 2013 Academic Emergency Medicine Global Health and Emergency Care Consensus Conference is evaluated and critical areas for future development in emergency care research internationally are identified., Methods: A retrospective review of all studies compiled in the Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) database from 2013 through 2015 was conducted. Articles were categorized and analyzed using descriptive quantitative measures and structured data matrices. The Global Emergency Medicine Think Tank Clinical Research Working Group at the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 2016 Annual Meeting then further conceptualized and defined global EM research priorities utilizing consensus-based decision making., Results: Research trends in global EM research published between 2013 and 2015 show a predominance of observational studies relative to interventional or descriptive studies, with the majority of research conducted in the inpatient setting in comparison to the ED or prehospital setting. Studies on communicable diseases and injury were the most prevalent, with a relative dearth of research on chronic noncommunicable diseases. The Global Emergency Medicine Think Tank Clinical Research Working Group identified conceptual frameworks to define high-impact research priorities, including the traditional approach of using global burden of disease to define priorities and the impact of EM on individual clinical care and public health opportunities. EM research is also described through a population lens approach, including gender, pediatrics, and migrant and refugee health., Conclusions: Despite recent strides in global EM research and a proliferation of scholarly output in the field, further work is required to advocate for and inform research priorities in global EM. The priorities outlined in this paper aim to guide future research in the field, with the goal of advancing the development of EM worldwide., (© 2017 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objectives: There are many barriers impeding the conduct of high-quality emergency care research, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Several of these barriers were originally outlined in 2013 as part of the Academic Emergency Medicine Global Health and Emergency Care Consensus Conference. This paper seeks to establish a broader consensus on the barriers to emergency care research globally and proposes a comprehensive array of new recommendations to overcome these barriers., Methods: An electronic survey was conducted of a purposive sample of global emergency medicine research experts from around the world to describe the major challenges and solutions to conducting emergency care research in low-resource settings and rank them by importance. The Global Emergency Medicine Think Tank Clinical Research Working Group at the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 2016 Annual Meeting utilized a modified Delphi technique for consensus-based decision making to categorize and expand upon these barriers and develop a comprehensive array of proposed solutions., Results: The working group identified four broad categories of barriers to conducting emergency care research globally, including 1) the limited availability of research personnel, particularly those with prior research training; 2) logistic barriers and lack of standardization of data collection; 3) ethical barriers to conducting research in resource-limited settings, particularly when no local institutional review board is available; and 4) the relative dearth of funding for global emergency care research. Proposed solutions included building a diverse and interdisciplinary research team structured to promote mentorship of junior researchers, utilizing local research assistants or technologic tools such as telemedicine for language translation, making use of new tools such as mobile health (mHealth) to standardize and streamline data collection, identifying alternatives to local institutional review board approval and the use of community consent when appropriate, and increased advocacy for global emergency care research funding., Conclusions: Significant barriers to the conduct of high-quality global emergency care research persist, and innovative strategies need to be adopted to promote and grow the field of global emergency care research. This paper provides a global consensus on the most important barriers identified, as well as recommendations for cost-effective strategies for overcoming these barriers with the overall goal of promoting high-quality research and improving emergency care worldwide., (© 2016 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objectives: The Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) conducts an annual search of peer-reviewed and gray literature relevant to global emergency medicine (EM) to identify, review, and disseminate the most important new research in this field to a global audience of academics and clinical practitioners., Methods: This year 12,435 articles written in six languages were identified by our search. These articles were distributed among 20 reviewers for initial screening based on their relevance to the field of global EM. An additional two reviewers searched the gray literature. A total of 723 articles were deemed appropriate by at least one reviewer and approved by their editor for formal scoring of overall quality and importance. Two independent reviewers scored all articles., Results: A total of 723 articles met our predetermined inclusion criteria and underwent full review. Sixty percent were categorized as emergency care in resource-limited settings (ECRLS), 17% as EM development (EMD), and 23% as disaster and humanitarian response (DHR). Twenty-four articles received scores of 18.5 or higher out of a maximum score 20 and were selected for formal summary and critique. Inter-rater reliability between reviewers gave an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.71 (95% confidence interval = 0.66 to 0.75). Studies and reviews with a focus on infectious diseases, trauma, and the diagnosis and treatment of diseases common in resource-limited settings represented the majority of articles selected for final review., Conclusions: In 2015, there were almost twice as many articles found by our search compared to the 2014 review. The number of EMD articles increased, while the number ECRLS articles decreased. The number of DHR articles remained stable. As in prior years, the majority of articles focused on infectious diseases., (© 2016 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objectives: The Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) conducts an annual search of peer-reviewed and gray literature relevant to global emergency medicine (EM) to identify, review, and disseminate the most important new research in this field to a worldwide audience of academics and clinical practitioners., Methods: This year 6,376 articles written in six languages were identified by our search. These articles were distributed among 20 reviewers for initial screening based on their relevance to the field of global EM. An additional two reviewers searched the gray literature. A total of 477 articles were deemed appropriate by at least one reviewer and approved by the editor for formal scoring of overall quality and importance., Results: Of the 477 articles that met our predetermined inclusion criteria, 63% were categorized as emergency care in resource-limited settings, 13% as EM development, and 23% as disaster and humanitarian response. Twenty-five articles received scores of 17.5 or higher and were selected for formal summary and critique. Inter-rater reliability for two reviewers using our scoring system was good, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.657 (95% confidence interval = 0.589 to 0.713). Studies and reviews focusing on infectious diseases, trauma, and the diagnosis and treatment of diseases common in resource-limited settings represented the majority of articles selected for final review., Conclusions: In 2014, there were fewer total articles, but a slightly higher absolute number of articles screening in for formal scoring, when compared to the 2013 review. The number of EM development articles decreased, while the number of disaster and humanitarian response articles increased. As in prior years, the majority of articles focused on infectious diseases and trauma., (© 2015 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Increasing numbers of emergency medicine (EM) residents and fellows are completing additional training with the intention of pursuing careers in global emergency medicine (GEM). At the same time, many academic emergency departments (EDs) are investing in the development of GEM divisions and global/international EM fellowship programs. However, the path for a successful career in this subspecialty has still not been defined., Objective: Our aim was to survey emergency physicians engaged in GEM in order to characterize their practice patterns and career paths, and to identify barriers to a successful career., Methods: An online survey assessing demographics, timing and content of work, financing and barriers, and academic productivity was deployed to emergency physicians. Descriptive statistics were analyzed using STATA software., Results: A total of 116 attending emergency physicians responded. Female respondents tended to be younger (51% vs. 27%; p = 0.012). Younger respondents were more likely to have completed advanced GEM training (20% vs. 7%; p = 0.037). Most (73%) respondents spent fewer than 3 months annually abroad. Self funding was the most common (47%) source of funding, while only 16% reported receiving grant support. Lack of time and funding were the most commonly encountered barriers to a career in GEM (64% and 55%, respectively)., Conclusions: Our survey provides an understanding of the amount of time that emergency physicians in GEM spend abroad and the types of activities in which they are currently engaged, as well as the barriers that need to be overcome in order to achieve fulfilling careers in this field., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Over the past few decades there has been a steady growth in funding for global health, yet generally little is known about funding for global health research. As part of the 2013 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference, a session was convened to discuss emergency care research funding in the global health context. Overall, the authors found a lack of evidence available to determine funding priorities or quantify current funding for acute care research in global health. This article summarizes the initial preparatory research and reports on the results of the consensus conference focused on identifying challenges and strategies to improve funding for global emergency care research. The consensus conference meeting led to the creation of near- and long-term goals to strengthen global emergency care research funding and the development of important research questions. The research questions represent a consensus view of important outstanding questions that will assist emergency care researchers to better understand the current funding landscape and bring evidence to the debate on funding priorities of global health and emergency care. The four key areas of focus for researchers are: 1) quantifying funding for global health and emergency care research, 2) understanding current research funding priorities, 3) identifying barriers to emergency care research funding, and 4) using existing data to quantify the need for emergency services and acute care research. This research agenda will enable emergency health care scientists to use evidence when advocating for more funding for emergency care research., (© 2013 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Barriers to global emergency care development include a critical lack of data in several areas, including limited documentation of the acute disease burden, lack of agreement on essential components of acute care systems, and a lack of consensus on key analytic elements, such as diagnostic classification schemes and regionally appropriate metrics for impact evaluation. These data gaps obscure the profound health effects of lack of emergency care access in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). As part of the Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference "Global Health and Emergency Care: A Research Agenda," a breakout group sought to develop a priority research agenda for data collection and management within global emergency care systems., (© 2013 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

The goal of a global health elective is for residents and medical students to have safe, structured, and highly educational experiences. In this article, the authors have laid out considerations for establishing a safe clinical site; ensuring a traveler's personal safety, health, and wellness; and mitigating risk during a global health rotation. Adequate oversight, appropriate mentorship, and a well-defined safety and security plan are all critical elements to a successful and safe experience., (© 2013 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)