ArticleGlobal journal of health science2012
Reliability and validity of a new survey to assess global health competencies of health professionals.
Article in Global journal of health science, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Initial Validity Evidence for the Student Health Equity Survey: Assessing Knowledge, Attitudes, and Capacity across Health Professions Programs.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2025Article
- Chinese version and application of the global health competencies survey for healthcare professionals.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Development and Evaluation of the Course on Global Health Nursing for Indian Nursing Students.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Teaching the Yale Health Education and Literacy for Asylees and Refugees: An Innovative Educational Initiative About Refugee Health for Medical Trainees.Academic pediatrics · 2021Article
- A global health capstone: an innovative educational approach in a competency-based curriculum for medical students.BMC medical education · 2020Article
- Students' perceptions of global health competencies in the doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) curriculum.Currents in pharmacy teaching & learning · 2020Article
- Implementation of global health competencies: A scoping review on target audiences, levels, and pedagogy and assessment strategies.PloS one · 2020Article
- Teledermatology and teledermatopathology as educational tools for international dermatology: a virtual grand rounds pilot curriculum.International journal of dermatology · 2018Article
- Global Health Competency Self-Confidence Scale: Tool Development and Validation.Global health, science and practice · 2018Article
- Developing a tool to measure the reciprocal benefits that accrue to health professionals involved in global health.BMJ global health · 2018Article
- Perceived reciprocal value of health professionals' participation in global child health-related work.Globalization and health · 2017Article
- Assessing and comparing global health competencies in rehabilitation students.Rehabilitation research and practice · 2013Article
- How do Ontario family medicine residents perform on global health competencies? A multi-institutional survey.Canadian medical education journal · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveHealth professionals are paying increased attention to issues of global health. However, there are no current competency assessment tools appropriate for evaluating their competency in global health. This study aims to assess the validity and reliability of a global health competency survey for different health disciplines.
methodsA total of 429 students participated in the Global Health Competency Survey, drawn from family medicine residency, nursing, physiotherapy and occupational therapy programs of five universities in Ontario, Canada. The surveys were evaluated for face and content validity and reliability.
resultsFactor analysis was used to identify the main factors to be included in the reliability analysis. Content validity was supported with one floor effect in the "racial/ethnic disparities" variable (36.1%), and few ceiling effects. Seven of the twenty-two variables performed the best (between 34% and 59.6%). For the overall rating score, no participants had floor or ceiling effects. Five factors were identified which accounted for 95% of the variance. Cronbach's alpha was >0.8 indicating that the survey items had good internal consistency and represent a homogeneous construct.
conclusionThe Global Health Competency Survey demonstrated good internal consistency and validity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.