Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40864633›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2025

Learning from failure: Simulating pandemic agreement negotiations in a global health classroom.

Julia Smith, Ellie Gooderham, Julianne Piper

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Julia SmithFaculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5175-1109
Ellie GooderhamFaculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8380-0825
Julianne PiperFaculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Serious games, including simulations, are increasingly used in university teaching, including in medical and humanitarian fields, as well as in political science and international relations. There is less evidence of application in global health pedagogy. This article reports and reflects on the use of a simulation of global pandemic treaty negotiations in a Master of Public Health class on Global Health and International Affairs. Through participant observation and thematic analysis of students' reflective essays we found that the simulation enabled deep learning in line with the assignment objectives (to apply learning from past health crises, engage with key concepts, and experience global health cooperation and challenges), as well as prompted critical reflections on moral dilemmas related to global health cooperation and decolonizing global health. The simulation provided students with an opportunity to engage with wicked problems embedded within global health by drawing on multiple perspectives and approaches. While the students ultimately failed to successfully negotiate a pandemic treaty, it was these failures that provided opportunities for deep learning and critical reflection as they questioned constraints on their underlying motivations and actions. This experience suggests simulations can serve as a particularly apt approach for teaching interdisciplinary approaches to global health as they enable students to apply different sets of knowledge to a particular problem, explore unfamiliar concepts, and critically assess their assumptions.

Identifiers

PMID40864633
PMCPMC12385383

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.