ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Anti-racist and anti-colonial content within US global health curricula.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
There is a growing interest to address pervasive racist and colonialist practices in global health (GH). However, there is a paucity of information on anti-racist and anti-colonial (ARAC) education for GH trainees. This study aimed to identify curricular strengths and gaps in ARAC content for pediatric, family medicine and emergency medicine trainees participating in GH. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of GH programs' ARAC curricular content from May 2021 to January 2022. The survey was distributed to 148 GH program educational leaders via email. Descriptive statistics were used to describe quantitative data and comments were reviewed for common themes. The survey response rate was 44% (n = 65). The most represented programs were pediatric residency GH tracks (n = 24, 37%) and emergency medicine (n = 13, 20%), family medicine (n = 4, 6%) and pediatric emergency medicine (n = 6, 9%) GH fellowships. 28% of programs (n = 18) did not have faculty who identify as underrepresented minorities or international medical graduates. 56 programs (86%) had a formal GH pre-departure curriculum. The following areas were the least covered in respondents' curricula: anti-racism (n = 34, 53%), white saviorism (n = 34, 53%), history of GH (n = 24, 37.5%). 63% (n = 40) had bidirectional exchanges of trainees or faculty, but often with significant limitations. While most GH programs recognized the need for formal pre-departure training prior to international experiences, we identified a lack of diversity among GH faculty, significant areas for improvement in curricular content, and a need for more robust bi-directional partnerships. A more equitable future in GH hinges on addressing these educational gaps.
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.