Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32587815›Full record

ArticleAnnals of global health2020

Global Health and Public Health Majors and Minors at 411 Universities, 2019-2020.

Caryl E Waggett, Kathryn H Jacobsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of global health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Caryl E WaggettDepartment of Global Health Studies, Allegheny College, Meadville, PA, US.ORCID 0000-0003-4198-1485
Kathryn H JacobsenDepartment of Global and Community Health, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, US.ORCID 0000-0002-4198-6246

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There has been rapid growth in the popularity of undergraduate degrees in global and public health, but that growth has not been evenly distributed across different types of institutions of higher education. Objective: To examine the prevalence of undergraduate global and public health majors and minors and related degrees at a diversity of higher education institutions in the United States during the 2019-20 academic year. Methods: We examined curricular offerings at the top 100 national universities, national liberal arts colleges, regional universities, and regional colleges included in the 2020 Findings: In total, 101 (25%) of the 411 schools offer a general public health, community health, or global health major, 105 (26%) a minor, and 144 (35%) a major and/or minor. When subdisciplines and other population health related programs are included, 160 (39%) offer a major, 183 (45%) a minor, and 227 (55%) a major and/or minor, including 83% of national universities, 57% of regional universities, 45% of national liberal arts colleges, and 35% of regional colleges. Global health programs, usually minors, are offered by 32% of national universities and 8% of national liberal arts colleges. Conclusions: Global and public health have become common areas of primary and secondary study at the bachelor's level at diverse schools in the United States. Although these degree pathways are especially prevalent at large urban universities, schools of all sizes, types, and locations have invested in offering educational programs in population health areas.

Indexed as

CurriculumUniversitiesGlobal HealthHumansPublic HealthUnited States

Identifiers

PMID32587815
PMCPMC7304449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.