ArticleBMJ open2019
Understanding perceptions of global healthcare experiences on provider values and practices in the USA: a qualitative study among global health physicians and program directors.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe study aimed to qualitatively examine the perspectives of US-based physicians and academic global health programme leaders on how global health work shapes their viewpoints, values and healthcare practices back in the USA.
designA prospective, qualitative exploratory study that employed online questionnaires and open-ended, semi-structured interviews with two participant groups: (1) global health physicians and (2) global health programme leaders affiliated with USA-based academic medical centres. Open coding procedures and thematic content analysis were used to analyse data and derive themes for discussion.
participants159 global health physicians and global health programme leaders at 25 academic medical institutions were invited via email to take a survey and participate in a follow-up interview. Twelve participants completed online questionnaires (7.5% response rate) and eight participants (four survey participants and four additionally recruited participants) participated in in-depth, in-person or phone semi-structured interviews.
resultsFive themes emerged that highlight how global health physicians and academic global health programme leaders perceive global health work abroad in shaping USA-based medical practices: (1) a sense of improved patient rapport, particularly with low-income, refugee and immigrant patients, and improved and more engaged patient care; (2) reduced spending on healthcare services; (3) greater awareness of the social determinants of health; (4) deeper understanding of the USA's healthcare system compared with systems in other countries; and (5) a reinforcement of values that initially motivated physicians to pursue work in global health.
conclusionsA majority of participating global health physicians and programme leaders believed that international engagements improved patient care back in the USA. Participant responses relating to the five themes were contextualised by highlighting factors that simultaneously impinge on their ability to provide improved patient care, such as the social determinants of health, and the challenges of changing USA healthcare policy.
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.