Low- and Middle-Income Country Host Perceptions of Short-Term Experiences in Global Health: A Systematic Review

Lu, Paul M.; Mansour, Rania; Qiu, Maylene; Andia-Biraro, Irene; Rabin, Tracy L.

doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000003867

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Upon conclusion of the data collection and analysis phases, it became known that a similar study of perceptions of global health activities in LMICs had been conducted concurrently to the current study (Lu, Mansour, Qiu, Biraro, & Rabin, 2021). The study by Lu et al had similar objectives, but was conducted using different methodology (Lu et al, 2021). Despite the different methodological approaches, these contemporaneously conducted scoping and systematic reviews achieved similar results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…This study is among the first to collectively examine local perceptions of GHEs in LMICs, with a notable exception. Upon conclusion of the data collection and analysis phases, it became known that a similar study of perceptions of global health activities in LMICs had been conducted concurrently to the current study (Lu, Mansour, Qiu, Biraro, & Rabin, 2021). The study by Lu et al had similar objectives, but was conducted using different methodology (Lu et al, 2021).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Low- and Middle-Income Country Perceptions of Global Health Engagements: A Scoping Review

Amick,

Sharmin,

Bucher

et al. 2024

GJHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

More than one million Americans are estimated to participate in global health engagements (GHEs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) each year. A growing number of studies document perceptions of GHEs from the perspective of American and other high-income country (HIC) visitors traveling to LMICs, particularly regarding motivations and satisfaction relative to their participation in these activities. Far fewer studies examine perceptions of GHEs from the perspective of LMIC hosts and other local constituent groups. The purpose of this study was to identify and analyze studies that examined local stakeholder perspectives of global health engagements in LMICs around the world. We conducted a scoping review of PubMed and Google Scholar using the Population-Concept-Context (PCC) framework. Assessment and analysis of articles was conducted by a team of three reviewers (EA, FS, SB). A total of 31 relevant papers published between 2009 and 2021 provided local perspectives of GHEs, with participants falling into three stakeholder categories: providers of care, recipients of care, and community members. Analysis revealed that stakeholder groups often held complex and highly nuanced perspectives of GHEs, perceiving these activities as having both positive and negative implications in the host communities. Synthesis of the eligible studies’ findings resulted in three thematic categories: resources and perceived benefits derived from GHEs; perceived challenges associated with GHEs; and opportunities for improvement of GHEs. To our knowledge, this scoping review is among the first to identify and collectively analyze LMIC stakeholder perceptions of GHEs. Recommendations for future research are provided.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Low- and Middle-Income Country Perceptions of Global Health Engagements: A Scoping Review

Amick,

Sharmin,

Bucher

et al. 2024

GJHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is clear that medical tourism can be harmful, especially when performed by unsupervised students [ 17 , 18 ] or even laypersons [ 19 ]. In addition, physicians working in these settings, even with good intentions, may also have a negative impact [ 20 , 21 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applicability of working abroad for physicians with a specialization in Global Health and Tropical Medicine

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In The Netherlands, physicians specialized in global health and tropical medicine (Ps-GHTM) are trained to work in low-resource settings (LRS) after their training program of 27 months. After working for a period of time in LRS, many Ps-GHTM continue their careers in the Dutch healthcare system. While there is limited evidence regarding the value of international health experience for medical students and residents, it is unknown to what extent this applies to Ps-GHTM and to their clinical practice in the Netherlands. Methods In this qualitative study we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs) with Ps-GHTM to explore the perceived applicability of their experience abroad for their subsequent return to the Netherlands. Topic guides were developed using literature about the applicability of working abroad. Findings from the interviews served as a starting point for FGDs. The interviews and FGDs were analysed using directed content analysis. Results 15 themes are described relating experience abroad to healthcare delivery in The Netherlands: broad medical perspective, holistic perspective, adaptive communication skills, creativity, flexibility, cultural awareness, self-reliance, clinical competence, cost awareness, public health, leadership, open-mindedness, organization of care, self-development, and teamwork. Highlighting the variety in competencies and the complexity of the topic, not all themes were recognized by all respondents in the FGDs nor deemed equally relevant. Flexibility, cultural awareness and holistic perspective are examples of important benefits to work experience in LRS. Conclusion Ps-GHTM bring their competencies to LRS and return to the Netherlands with additionally developed skills and knowledge. These may contribute to healthcare delivery in the Netherlands. This reciprocal value is an important factor for the sustainable development of global health. Identifying the competencies derived from work experience in LRS could give stakeholders insight into the added value of Ps-GHTM and partly help in refining the specialization program.

show abstract

“…Scholarly projects conducted by trainees at schools of medicine, public health, and other health disciplines in HIC often exacerbate these problems, so there has been a reinvigorated discourse to address the principles, processes, and protocols of these institutions [24][25][26][27][28][29][30]. HIC institutions must understand that engaging in global health research is not necessarily benign; failing to create equitable partnerships, regardless of original intentions, exacerbates existing structural violence and inequities and causes further harm [31].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Striving towards true equity in global health: A checklist for bilateral research partnerships

Hodson

Etoundi

Parikh

et al. 2023

PLOS Glob Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interest in “global health” among schools of medicine, public health, and other health disciplines in high-income countries (HIC) continues to rise. Persistent power imbalances, racism, and maintenance of colonialism/neocolonialism plague global health efforts, including global health scholarship. Scholarly projects conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) by trainees at these schools in HIC often exacerbate these problems. Drawing on published literature and shared experiences, we review key inequalities within each phase of research, from design through implementation and analysis/dissemination, and make concrete and practical recommendations to improve equity at each stage. Key problems facing global health scholarship include HIC-centric nature of global health organizations, paucity of funding directly available for LMIC investigators and trainees, misplaced emphasis on HIC selected issues rather than local solutions to local problems, the dominance of English language in the scientific literature, and exploitation of LMIC team members. Four key principles lie at the foundation of all our recommendations: 1) seek locally derived and relevant solutions to global health issues, 2) create paired collaborations between HIC and LMIC institutions at all levels of training, 3) provide funding for both HIC and LMIC team members, 4) assign clear roles and responsibilities to value, leverage, and share the strengths of all team members. When funding for global health research is predicated upon more ethical and equitable collaborations, the nature of global health collaborations will evolve to be more ethical and equitable. Therefore, we propose the Douala Equity Checklist as a 20-item tool HIC and LMIC institutions can use throughout the conduct of global health projects to ensure more equitable collaborations.

show abstract

Low- and Middle-Income Country Host Perceptions of Short-Term Experiences in Global Health: A Systematic Review

Cited by 12 publications

References 68 publications

Low- and Middle-Income Country Perceptions of Global Health Engagements: A Scoping Review

Low- and Middle-Income Country Perceptions of Global Health Engagements: A Scoping Review

Applicability of working abroad for physicians with a specialization in Global Health and Tropical Medicine

Striving towards true equity in global health: A checklist for bilateral research partnerships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About