Equitable access to global health internships: a documentary short
Bibliographic record
Abstract
WHO operates at the centre of the international health system. Its mandate, to promote the health of people worldwide, requires it to build technical and operational skills within the health systems of its 193 member states. For many of these states, particularly those of low income that face growing disease burdens, developing skills in the next generation of public health professionals is imperative. WHO's Internship Programme exists to support this goal. Each year, about 1000 young professionals from across the world join the programme, of whom the majority (61%) work at WHO's headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. However, less than 20% of interns come from developing countries.1Barnett-Vanes A Feng C Jamnejad M Jun J Towards an equitable internship programme at WHO: is reform nigh?.BMJ Glob Health. 2016; 1: e000088Crossref PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar, 2Barnett-Vanes A Kedia T Anyangwe S Equitable access to global health internships, insights and strategies at WHO headquarters.Lancet Glob Health. 2014; 2: e257-e259Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (3) Google Scholar, 3WHO Human resources: annual report and Workforce data tables, as at 31 December 2016.in: 70th World Health Assembly. 2017http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA70/A70_45-en.pdfGoogle Scholar This imbalance in member state participation has two principal causes: an absence of financial support for interns, which precludes the participation of many from low-income and middle-income countries; and an ad-hoc recruitment process that favours candidates with connections in well-established academic institutions, typically in high-income countries. The result is a missed opportunity for WHO and inadvertently undermines its own objectives on human resources for health. Accordingly, a group of former WHO interns supported by a group of non-governmental organisations ran a public fundraising campaign to financially support two young public health professionals from low-income and middle-income countries to intern at WHO's headquarters. Selected for scholarships by an independent panel of global health experts, these two interns travelled from Uganda and Tunisia for 3-month internships in Geneva. Filmmakers in Uganda, Tunisia, Switzerland, and the UK produced a short film to document the interns' experiences and explore the wider implications of their journey. In both cases, the internship served as a launch pad for their careers in public health. These issues have been discussed at meetings of WHO's governing bodies, including the 2016 and 2017 Executive Board meetings and World Health Assemblies,1Barnett-Vanes A Feng C Jamnejad M Jun J Towards an equitable internship programme at WHO: is reform nigh?.BMJ Glob Health. 2016; 1: e000088Crossref PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar, 4WHO Provisional summary of the third meeting—A70/B/PSR/3. 2017http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA70-A-B-PSR/A70_BPSR3-en.pdfGoogle Scholar but with little progress to date. With the election of a new WHO Director-General, the next phase of WHO reform beckons and with it a chance to bring equity to its internship programme. We applaud his recognition that talent is universal and urge the Director-General to seize this opportunity, together with member states, to lead comprehensive and lasting reform. In this documentary, we move beyond statistics and follow the journey of two interns, whose stories speak for a generation full of potential and whom WHO has both a responsibility and direct interest in nurturing.5Owaseye O Perspectives of a Nigerian former WHO-HQ intern.Pan Afr Med J. 2015; 22: 42Crossref PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar AB-V reports grants and non-financial support from Royal Society of Arts and grants from Public Health Research Centre at Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. RY reports personal fees from Child Family Health International. TK reports grants and non-financial support from Child Family Health International, grants and non-financial support from Royal Society of Arts. TR reports grants from Dutch Government of Foreign Affairs (MinBuza), grants from British Government (DFID), grants from Open Society Foundation (OSF), grants from European Union (CHAFEA), grants from Helmsley Trust, and grants from Camino Foundation. All other authors declare no competing interests. TK and AB-V contributed equally.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".