You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

XML
Practice
Developing a tool to measure the reciprocal benefits that accrue to health professionals involved in global health
  1. Jannah Margaret Wigle1,2,
  2. Nadia Akseer1,2,
  3. Sarah Carbone1,3,
  4. Raluca Barac1,
  5. Melanie Barwick1,2,4,
  6. Stanley Zlotkin1,2,5,6
  1. 1 Centre for Global Child Health, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  2. 2 Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  3. 3 Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  4. 4 Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  5. 5 Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  6. 6 Department of Paediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  1. Correspondence to Nadia Akseer; nadia.akseer{at}sickkids.ca

Abstract

Research to date on global health collaborations has typically focused on documenting improvements in the health outcomes of low/middle-income countries. Recent discourse has characterised these collaborations with the notion of ‘reciprocal value’, namely, that the benefits go beyond strengthening local health systems and that both partners have something to learn and gain from the relationship. We explored a method for assessing this reciprocal value by developing a robust framework for measuring changes in individual competencies resulting from participation in global health work. The validated survey and evidence-based framework were developed from a comprehensive review of the literature on global health competencies and reciprocal value. Statistical analysis including factor analysis, evaluation of internal consistency of domains and measurement of floor and ceiling effects were conducted to explore global health competencies among diverse health professionals at a tertiary paediatric health facility in Toronto, Canada. Factor analysis identified eight unique domains of competencies for health professionals and their institutions resulting from participation in global health work. Seven domains related to individual-level competencies and one emphasised institutional capacity strengthening. The resulting Global Health Competency Model and validated survey represent useful approaches to measuring the reciprocal value of global health work among diverse health professionals and settings. Insights gained through application of the model and survey may challenge the dominant belief that capacity strengthening for this work primarily benefits the recipient individuals and institutions in low/middle-income settings.

  • paediatrics
  • other study design
  • child dealth
  • p[ublic health

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000792

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Handling editor Alberto L. Garcia-Basteiro

    • Contributors JMW: drafted the manuscript, carried out statistical analyses, created tables and figures, and approved the final manuscript as submitted. NA: designed the analytic plan, reviewed statistical analyses, critically reviewed the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. SC: designed the data collection instruments, contributed to the draft of the methods, critically reviewed the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. RB: reviewed and revised the study protocol and survey, coded open-ended questions, critically reviewed the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. MB: reviewed and revised the study protocol and survey, critically reviewed the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. SZ: conceptualised the study, reviewed and revised the study protocol, survey and manuscript, and approved the final manuscript as submitted.

    • Funding This study was funded by the Centre for Global Child Health, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent Not required.

    • Ethics approval Hospital for Sick Children Ethics Review Board.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Data sharing statement Data from this study is available upon request through the corresponding author.