Purpose
As global health education and training shift toward competency-based approaches, academic institutions and organizations must define appropriate assessment strategies for use across health professions. The authors aim to develop entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for global health to apply across academic and workplace settings.
Method
In 2019, the authors invited 55 global health experts from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and public health to participate in a multiround, online Delphi process; 30 (55%) agreed. Experts averaged 17 years of global health experience, and 12 (40%) were from low- to middle-income countries. In round one, participants listed essential global health activities. The authors used in vivo coding for round one responses to develop initial EPA statements. In subsequent rounds, participants used 5-point Likert-type scales to evaluate EPA statements for importance and relevance to global health across health professions. The authors elevated statements that were rated 4 (important/relevant to most) or 5 (very important/relevant to all) by a minimum of 70% of participants (decided a priori) to the final round, during which participants evaluated whether each statement represented an observable unit of work that could be assigned to a trainee. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data analysis. The authors used participant comments to categorize EPA statements into role domains.
Results
Twenty-two EPA statements reached at least 70% consensus. The authors categorized these into 5 role domains: partnership developer, capacity builder, data analyzer, equity advocate, and health promoter. Statements in the equity advocate and partnership developer domains had the highest agreement for importance and relevance. Several statements achieved 100% agreement as a unit of work but achieved lower levels of agreement regarding their observability.
Purpose
As global health education and training shift toward competency-based approaches, academic institutions and organizations must define appropriate assessment strategies for use across health professions. The authors aim to develop entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for global health to apply across academic and workplace settings.
Method
In 2019, the authors invited 55 global health experts from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and public health to participate in a multiround, online Delphi process; 30 (55%) agreed. Experts averaged 17 years of global health experience, and 12 (40%) were from low- to middle-income countries. In round one, participants listed essential global health activities. The authors used in vivo coding for round one responses to develop initial EPA statements. In subsequent rounds, participants used 5-point Likert-type scales to evaluate EPA statements for importance and relevance to global health across health professions. The authors elevated statements that were rated 4 (important/relevant to most) or 5 (very important/relevant to all) by a minimum of 70% of participants (decided a priori) to the final round, during which participants evaluated whether each statement represented an observable unit of work that could be assigned to a trainee. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data analysis. The authors used participant comments to categorize EPA statements into role domains.
Results
Twenty-two EPA statements reached at least 70% consensus. The authors categorized these into 5 role domains: partnership developer, capacity builder, data analyzer, equity advocate, and health promoter. Statements in the equity advocate and partnership developer domains had the highest agreement for importance and relevance. Several statements achieved 100% agreement as a unit of work but achieved lower levels of agreement regarding their observability.
Purpose
As global health education and training shift toward competency-based approaches, academic institutions and organizations must define appropriate assessment strategies for use across health professions. The authors aim to develop entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for global health to apply across academic and workplace settings.
Method
In 2019, the authors invited 55 global health experts from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and public health to participate in a multiround, online Delphi process; 30 (55%) agreed. Experts averaged 17 years of global health experience, and 12 (40%) were from low- to middle-income countries. In round one, participants listed essential global health activities. The authors used in vivo coding for round one responses to develop initial EPA statements. In subsequent rounds, participants used 5-point Likert-type scales to evaluate EPA statements for importance and relevance to global health across health professions. The authors elevated statements that were rated 4 (important/relevant to most) or 5 (very important/relevant to all) by a minimum of 70% of participants (decided a priori) to the final round, during which participants evaluated whether each statement represented an observable unit of work that could be assigned to a trainee. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data analysis. The authors used participant comments to categorize EPA statements into role domains.
Results
Twenty-two EPA statements reached at least 70% consensus. The authors categorized these into 5 role domains: partnership developer, capacity builder, data analyzer, equity advocate, and health promoter. Statements in the equity advocate and partnership developer domains had the highest agreement for importance and relevance. Several statements achieved 100% agreement as a unit of work but achieved lower levels of agreement regarding their observability.
Purpose
As global health education and training shift toward competency-based approaches, academic institutions and organizations must define appropriate assessment strategies for use across health professions. The authors aim to develop entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for global health to apply across academic and workplace settings.
Method
In 2019, the authors invited 55 global health experts from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and public health to participate in a multiround, online Delphi process; 30 (55%) agreed. Experts averaged 17 years of global health experience, and 12 (40%) were from low- to middle-income countries. In round one, participants listed essential global health activities. The authors used in vivo coding for round one responses to develop initial EPA statements. In subsequent rounds, participants used 5-point Likert-type scales to evaluate EPA statements for importance and relevance to global health across health professions. The authors elevated statements that were rated 4 (important/relevant to most) or 5 (very important/relevant to all) by a minimum of 70% of participants (decided a priori) to the final round, during which participants evaluated whether each statement represented an observable unit of work that could be assigned to a trainee. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data analysis. The authors used participant comments to categorize EPA statements into role domains.
Results
Twenty-two EPA statements reached at least 70% consensus. The authors categorized these into 5 role domains: partnership developer, capacity builder, data analyzer, equity advocate, and health promoter. Statements in the equity advocate and partnership developer domains had the highest agreement for importance and relevance. Several statements achieved 100% agreement as a unit of work but achieved lower levels of agreement regarding their observability.
Purpose
As global health education and training shift toward competency-based approaches, academic institutions and organizations must define appropriate assessment strategies for use across health professions. The authors aim to develop entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for global health to apply across academic and workplace settings.
Method
In 2019, the authors invited 55 global health experts from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and public health to participate in a multiround, online Delphi process; 30 (55%) agreed. Experts averaged 17 years of global health experience, and 12 (40%) were from low- to middle-income countries. In round one, participants listed essential global health activities. The authors used in vivo coding for round one responses to develop initial EPA statements. In subsequent rounds, participants used 5-point Likert-type scales to evaluate EPA statements for importance and relevance to global health across health professions. The authors elevated statements that were rated 4 (important/relevant to most) or 5 (very important/relevant to all) by a minimum of 70% of participants (decided a priori) to the final round, during which participants evaluated whether each statement represented an observable unit of work that could be assigned to a trainee. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data analysis. The authors used participant comments to categorize EPA statements into role domains.
Results
Twenty-two EPA statements reached at least 70% consensus. The authors categorized these into 5 role domains: partnership developer, capacity builder, data analyzer, equity advocate, and health promoter. Statements in the equity advocate and partnership developer domains had the highest agreement for importance and relevance. Several statements achieved 100% agreement as a unit of work but achieved lower levels of agreement regarding their observability.
Purpose
As global health education and training shift toward competency-based approaches, academic institutions and organizations must define appropriate assessment strategies for use across health professions. The authors aim to develop entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for global health to apply across academic and workplace settings.
Method
In 2019, the authors invited 55 global health experts from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and public health to participate in a multiround, online Delphi process; 30 (55%) agreed. Experts averaged 17 years of global health experience, and 12 (40%) were from low- to middle-income countries. In round one, participants listed essential global health activities. The authors used in vivo coding for round one responses to develop initial EPA statements. In subsequent rounds, participants used 5-point Likert-type scales to evaluate EPA statements for importance and relevance to global health across health professions. The authors elevated statements that were rated 4 (important/relevant to most) or 5 (very important/relevant to all) by a minimum of 70% of participants (decided a priori) to the final round, during which participants evaluated whether each statement represented an observable unit of work that could be assigned to a trainee. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data analysis. The authors used participant comments to categorize EPA statements into role domains.
Results
Twenty-two EPA statements reached at least 70% consensus. The authors categorized these into 5 role domains: partnership developer, capacity builder, data analyzer, equity advocate, and health promoter. Statements in the equity advocate and partnership developer domains had the highest agreement for importance and relevance. Several statements achieved 100% agreement as a unit of work but achieved lower levels of agreement regarding their observability.
Purpose
As global health education and training shift toward competency-based approaches, academic institutions and organizations must define appropriate assessment strategies for use across health professions. The authors aim to develop entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for global health to apply across academic and workplace settings.
Method
In 2019, the authors invited 55 global health experts from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and public health to participate in a multiround, online Delphi process; 30 (55%) agreed. Experts averaged 17 years of global health experience, and 12 (40%) were from low- to middle-income countries. In round one, participants listed essential global health activities. The authors used in vivo coding for round one responses to develop initial EPA statements. In subsequent rounds, participants used 5-point Likert-type scales to evaluate EPA statements for importance and relevance to global health across health professions. The authors elevated statements that were rated 4 (important/relevant to most) or 5 (very important/relevant to all) by a minimum of 70% of participants (decided a priori) to the final round, during which participants evaluated whether each statement represented an observable unit of work that could be assigned to a trainee. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data analysis. The authors used participant comments to categorize EPA statements into role domains.
Results
Twenty-two EPA statements reached at least 70% consensus. The authors categorized these into 5 role domains: partnership developer, capacity builder, data analyzer, equity advocate, and health promoter. Statements in the equity advocate and partnership developer domains had the highest agreement for importance and relevance. Several statements achieved 100% agreement as a unit of work but achieved lower levels of agreement regarding their observability.
Purpose
As global health education and training shift toward competency-based approaches, academic institutions and organizations must define appropriate assessment strategies for use across health professions. The authors aim to develop entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for global health to apply across academic and workplace settings.
Method
In 2019, the authors invited 55 global health experts from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and public health to participate in a multiround, online Delphi process; 30 (55%) agreed. Experts averaged 17 years of global health experience, and 12 (40%) were from low- to middle-income countries. In round one, participants listed essential global health activities. The authors used in vivo coding for round one responses to develop initial EPA statements. In subsequent rounds, participants used 5-point Likert-type scales to evaluate EPA statements for importance and relevance to global health across health professions. The authors elevated statements that were rated 4 (important/relevant to most) or 5 (very important/relevant to all) by a minimum of 70% of participants (decided a priori) to the final round, during which participants evaluated whether each statement represented an observable unit of work that could be assigned to a trainee. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data analysis. The authors used participant comments to categorize EPA statements into role domains.
Results
Twenty-two EPA statements reached at least 70% consensus. The authors categorized these into 5 role domains: partnership developer, capacity builder, data analyzer, equity advocate, and health promoter. Statements in the equity advocate and partnership developer domains had the highest agreement for importance and relevance. Several statements achieved 100% agreement as a unit of work but achieved lower levels of agreement regarding their observability.
