Perceived roles, benefits and barriers of virtual global health partnership initiatives: a cross-sectional exploratory study.
Global health
Pandemic
Partnership
Virtual
Journal
Global health research and policy
ISSN: 2397-0642
Titre abrégé: Glob Health Res Policy
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101705789
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 04 2022
28 04 2022
Historique:
received:
22
10
2021
accepted:
27
03
2022
entrez:
28
4
2022
pubmed:
29
4
2022
medline:
30
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Virtual global health partnership initiatives (VGHPIs) evolved rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure partnership continuity. However the current landscape for VGHPI use and preference is unknown. This study aimed to increase understanding of GH partners' perspectives on VGHPIs. From 15 October to 30 November 2020, An online, international survey was conducted using snowball sampling to document pandemic-related changes in partnership activities, preferences for VGHPIs, and perceived acceptability and barriers. The survey underwent iterative development within a diverse author group, representing academic and clinical institutions, and the non-profit sector. Participants from their professional global health networks were invited, including focal points for global health partnerships while excluding trainees and respondents from the European Economic Area. Analysis stratified responses by country income classification and partnership type. Authors used descriptive statistics to characterize responses, defining statistical significance as α = 0.05. A total of 128 respondents described 219 partnerships. 152/219 (69%) partnerships were transnational, 157/219 (72%) were of > 5 years duration, and 127/219 (60%) included bidirectional site visits. High-income country (HIC) partners sent significantly more learners to low- to middle-income country (LMIC) partner sites (p < 0.01). Participants commented on pandemic-related disruptions affecting 217/219 (99%) partnerships; 195/217 (90%) were disruption to activities; 122/217 (56%) to communication; 73/217 (34%) to access to professional support; and 72/217 (33%) to funding. Respondents indicated that VGHPIs would be important to 206/219 (94%) of their partnerships moving forward. There were overall differences in resource availability, technological capacity, and VGHPI preferences between LMIC and HIC respondents, with a statistically significant difference in VGHPI acceptability (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between groups regarding VGHPIs' perceived barriers. The pandemic disrupted essential partnership elements, compounding differences between LMIC and HIC partners in their resources and preferences for partnership activities. VGHPIs have the potential to bridge new and existing gaps and maximize gains, bi-directionality, and equity in partnerships during and after COVID-19.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Virtual global health partnership initiatives (VGHPIs) evolved rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure partnership continuity. However the current landscape for VGHPI use and preference is unknown. This study aimed to increase understanding of GH partners' perspectives on VGHPIs.
METHODS
From 15 October to 30 November 2020, An online, international survey was conducted using snowball sampling to document pandemic-related changes in partnership activities, preferences for VGHPIs, and perceived acceptability and barriers. The survey underwent iterative development within a diverse author group, representing academic and clinical institutions, and the non-profit sector. Participants from their professional global health networks were invited, including focal points for global health partnerships while excluding trainees and respondents from the European Economic Area. Analysis stratified responses by country income classification and partnership type. Authors used descriptive statistics to characterize responses, defining statistical significance as α = 0.05.
RESULTS
A total of 128 respondents described 219 partnerships. 152/219 (69%) partnerships were transnational, 157/219 (72%) were of > 5 years duration, and 127/219 (60%) included bidirectional site visits. High-income country (HIC) partners sent significantly more learners to low- to middle-income country (LMIC) partner sites (p < 0.01). Participants commented on pandemic-related disruptions affecting 217/219 (99%) partnerships; 195/217 (90%) were disruption to activities; 122/217 (56%) to communication; 73/217 (34%) to access to professional support; and 72/217 (33%) to funding. Respondents indicated that VGHPIs would be important to 206/219 (94%) of their partnerships moving forward. There were overall differences in resource availability, technological capacity, and VGHPI preferences between LMIC and HIC respondents, with a statistically significant difference in VGHPI acceptability (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between groups regarding VGHPIs' perceived barriers.
CONCLUSIONS
The pandemic disrupted essential partnership elements, compounding differences between LMIC and HIC partners in their resources and preferences for partnership activities. VGHPIs have the potential to bridge new and existing gaps and maximize gains, bi-directionality, and equity in partnerships during and after COVID-19.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35478077
doi: 10.1186/s41256-022-00244-4
pii: 10.1186/s41256-022-00244-4
pmc: PMC9046069
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
11Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Ann Glob Health. 2020 Aug 19;86(1):103
pubmed: 32874934
Pediatrics. 2015 Sep;136(3):458-65
pubmed: 26260713
Acad Med. 2017 Dec;92(12):1674-1679
pubmed: 29019800
Lancet. 2004 May 29;363(9423):1832
pubmed: 15172796
Glob Pediatr Health. 2014 Dec 16;1:2333794X14563383
pubmed: 27335926
Glob Public Health. 2016 Mar;11(3):253-275
pubmed: 25642809
Acad Pediatr. 2016 May-Jun;16(4):387-93
pubmed: 26581780
Front Public Health. 2017 Mar 09;5:36
pubmed: 28337431
J Glob Health. 2020 Dec;10(2):020366
pubmed: 33214886
Ann Glob Health. 2015 Sep-Oct;81(5):593-601
pubmed: 27036715
Pediatrics. 2017 Oct;140(4):
pubmed: 28931576
J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81
pubmed: 18929686
J Bioeth Inq. 2015 Mar;12(1):63-7
pubmed: 25648120
Lancet. 2009 Jun 6;373(9679):1993-5
pubmed: 19493564
Eye (Lond). 2021 May;35(5):1459-1466
pubmed: 32651545
Neurosurg Focus. 2020 Mar 1;48(3):E15
pubmed: 32114551
Glob Health Action. 2010 Apr 06;3:
pubmed: 20386617
Lancet. 2014 Jan 4;383(9911):94-97
pubmed: 24388312
Glob Pediatr Health. 2016 Mar 14;3:2333794X16630671
pubmed: 27336002
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2021 Jun 28;105(2):407-412
pubmed: 34181576
Adv Pediatr. 2018 Aug;65(1):71-87
pubmed: 30053931
JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Jan;170(1):78-84
pubmed: 26619276
Global Health. 2019 Apr 2;15(1):27
pubmed: 30940155
J Glob Health. 2012 Jun;2(1):010301
pubmed: 23198126
Glob Public Health. 2020 Jul;15(7):1083-1089
pubmed: 32352911
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2010 Dec;83(6):1178-82
pubmed: 21118918
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Jan 7;5(1):e002172
pubmed: 32095274
MEDICC Rev. 2008 Jan;10(1):3
pubmed: 21483347
Med Educ. 2014 Apr;48(4):397-404
pubmed: 24606623
AEM Educ Train. 2020 Nov 21;5(1):79-90
pubmed: 33521495
Global Health. 2019 Aug 22;15(1):52
pubmed: 31438984
J Transcult Nurs. 2021 Mar;32(2):180-185
pubmed: 32865141
Int Health. 2018 Mar 1;10(2):63-65
pubmed: 29528402
Lancet. 2010 Feb 13;375(9714):535-7
pubmed: 20159277
Acad Med. 2019 Apr;94(4):482-489
pubmed: 30398990
BMC Med Educ. 2017 Jan 13;17(1):10
pubmed: 28086875
Virtual Mentor. 2010 Mar 01;12(3):184-9
pubmed: 23140865
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2020 Mar;102(3):649-657
pubmed: 31933470
JMIR Med Educ. 2020 Jul 17;6(2):e20190
pubmed: 32634107
J Surg Educ. 2020 Jul - Aug;77(4):729-732
pubmed: 32253133
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017 Jul;97(1):6-9
pubmed: 28719333
Global Health. 2013 Feb 14;9:5
pubmed: 23410089