Browsing by Author "Keating, Elizabeth M."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Global Health Partnerships During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspectives and Insights from International Partners
    (ASTMH, 2021-08) McHenry, Megan S.; Tam, Reena P.; Nafiseh, Amira A.; Etling, Mary Ann; Barnes, Adelaide E.; Rule, Amy R. L.; Crouse, Heather L.; Haq, Heather; Morris, Lee E.; Murray, Brittany L.; Umphrey, Lisa A.; Keating, Elizabeth M.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    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.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Perceived roles, benefits and barriers of virtual global health partnership initiatives: a cross-sectional exploratory study
    (BMC, 2022-04-28) Umphrey, Lisa; Paasi, George; Windsor, William; Abongo, Grace; Evert, Jessica; Haq, Heather; Keating, Elizabeth M.; Lam, Suet Kam; McHenry, Megan S.; Ndila, Carolyne; Nwobu, Charles; Rule, Amy; Tam, Reena P.; Olson, Daniel; Olupot‑Olupot, Peter; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    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.