When Global Becomes Virtual: A Survey of Virtual Global Health Education Activities During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Pediatric Educators.

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, global health education activities were disrupted. Transitioning to virtual options has allowed educators and trainees to continue global health education and partnerships, though the acceptability and implementation of this transition is unknown. Objective: To evaluate current and planned virtual global health education activities (VGHEAs) of a group of US global health educators during the COVID-19 pandemic and to assess perceived benefits and challenges of VGHEAs. Methods: A cross-sectional study of pediatric faculty and trainees involved in global health education from 8 institutions in the United States were surveyed anonymously about their global health education activities in 2021. Authors used representative convenience sampling and invited at least 1 faculty member and 2 trainees from each institution in the Midwest Consortium of Global Child Health Educators. Results: All 8 institutions responded to the survey, with 38 faculty and trainee participants. Institutional implementation of virtual education activities was variable. Respondents reported that VGHEAs allowed them to maintain partnerships with low-middle income countries, though they noted that unreliable internet connections presented challenges. One program reported funding cuts to its global health program during the pandemic. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic created challenges for global health education programs. Educators and trainees are interested in using potentially cost-saving VGHEAs to maintain international collaborations, continue global health education efforts, and even increase access to equitable educational activities despite pandemic disruptions.

Perceived roles, benefits and barriers of virtual global health partnership initiatives: a cross-sectional exploratory study.

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.

Global Health Partnerships During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspectives and Insights from International Partners.

Global health partnerships (GHPs) have encountered many challenges during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. New perspectives and insights are needed to guide GHPs when navigating current and future collaborations. This study aimed to understand perspectives and insights of international partners regarding how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted their GHPs with institutions in the United States. We performed a cross-sectional qualitative study conducted through virtual semi-structured interviews performed between June 12, 2020 and July 22, 2020. We queried academic institutions based in the United States to refer individuals from their corresponding international GHP organizations. We invited these individuals to participate in virtual interviews that were audio-recorded and transcribed. We analyzed data qualitatively to identify themes. Eighty-four United States partners provided e-mail addresses for international partners. Ten individuals from these GHPs completed the interview. Participants reported overall positive experiences with their United States-based partners during the pandemic. The following themes emerged: imbalanced decision-making; worry about partnership continuity; opportunity to optimize communication within partnerships; interest in incorporating technology to facilitate engagement; and a desire for increased bilateral exchanges. Several challenges appeared to exist before COVID-19 and were highlighted by the pandemic. Most respondents were optimistic regarding the future of their GHPs. However, concerns were expressed regarding the implications of fewer in-person international experiences with United States trainees and the desire for stronger communication. Although our results do not represent the perspectives and insights of all GHPs, they provide considerations for the future. We urge institutions in the United States to re-examine and strive for equitable relationships with their international partners.