Outbreak response capacity of the Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network across WHO's South-East Asia and Western Pacific regions.

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic challenged the Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network's (GOARN) mechanism used to rapidly deploy technical support for international responses and highlighted areas that require strengthened capacity within the Network. GOARN's partners in the World Health Organization's (WHO) South-East Asia and Western Pacific regions were engaged to explore their levels of preparedness, readiness and ability to respond to international public health emergencies. Methods: Consultative discussions were held and a survey was conducted with GOARN's partners from the two WHO regions. Discussion topics included partners' capacity to support and participate in a GOARN deployment, training, research and collaboration. Descriptive and content analyses were conducted. Results: Barriers to engaging in GOARN's international outbreak response efforts included limited numbers of personnel trained to respond to outbreaks; institutional, financial and administrative hurdles; and limited collaboration opportunities. Partners identified innovative solutions that could strengthen their engagement with deployment, such as financial subsidies, mentorship for less experienced staff, and the ability to provide remote support. Discussion: GOARN plays an important role in enabling WHO to fulfil its international alert and response duties during disease outbreaks and humanitarian crises that have the potential to spark disease outbreaks. Yet without systematic improvement to strengthen national outbreak capacity and regional connectedness, support for international outbreak responses may remain limited. Thus, it is necessary to integrate novel approaches to support international deployments, as identified in this study.

NIH director offers support for Asian researchers.

Six years into agency's efforts to curtail foreign interference, some say it should apologize.

The GIBACHT fellowship: a multilateral initiative for strengthening capacity in biosafety and biosecurity towards pandemic preparedness.

The German Biosecurity Programme was launched in 2013 with the aim to support partner countries overcome biological threats including natural outbreaks or the intentional misuse of highly pathogenic agents. As part of this programme, this paper describes the development and implementation of a multilateral biosafety and biosecurity training initiative, called 'Global Partnership Initiated Biosecurity Academia for Controlling Health Threats' (GIBACHT). To achieve its objectives, GIBACHT implemented a blended-learning approach with self-directed, distance-based learning phases and three training-of-trainer workshops. The programme follows Kirkpatrick's model of learning to guarantee sustainable effects of improved knowledge and skills. One hundred nine fellows from 26 countries have been trained in seven cohorts. Many GIBACHT alumni have established additional biosafety/biosecurity trainings in their home countries. The knowledge exchange is strengthened by the implementation of a Moodle-based alumni network. GIBACHT has the potential to contribute to strengthening the capacities of partner countries in Africa, the Middle East, and South and Central Asia to respond and build resilience to biological threats.

Motivators and mechanisms for an international rural health collaboration.

Collaborations are critical to address rural health challenges. We evaluated a new international collaboration between institutions in Georgia, the United States (US), and Scotland, United Kingdom (UK), to address rural health issues and to understand the barriers and facilitators to effective international collaboration efforts. A qualitative approach was used through in-depth interviews and focus groups with educators, researchers, and healthcare providers in the US and Scotland who were involved in the CONVERGE international rural health collaboration. Transcriptions were imported into the NVivo qualitative software program. A reflexive thematic analysis was employed to identify key themes from the collected data. Twelve interviews and two focus groups were conducted virtually with 17 participants. Two primary domains were identified from the thematic analysis: (1) motivators that increase engagement in international collaboration, and (2) mechanisms for, and barriers to, the continuity needed to create meaningful change. Six themes emerged related to commonality of issues, prospect of sharing knowledge, need of sustained funding and institutional support, and selection of human resources. Participants of CONVERGE were more likely to engage when they had a space to share ways to address challenging issues and integrate knowledge and practice. They were motivated by their desire for growth and the institutions they serve and emphasized that infrastructure support is vital for sustainable collaborations.

Limiting heterogeneity in cross-border data flow: Impact on domestic value chains stability and the role of innovation.

Amidst growing skepticism towards globalization and rising digital trade, this study investigates the impact of Restrictions on Cross-Border Data Flows (RCDF) on Domestic Value Chains (DVCs) stability. As global value chains participation declines, the stability of DVCs-integral to internal economic dynamics-becomes crucial. This study situates within a framework exploring the role of innovation and RCDF in the increasingly interconnected global trade. Using a panel data fixed effect model, our analysis provides insights into the varying effects of RCDF on DVCs stability across countries with diverse economic structures and technological advancement levels. This approach allows for a nuanced understanding of the interplay between digital trade policies, value chain stability, and innovation. RCDF tend to disrupt DVCs by negatively impacting innovation, which necessitates proactive policy measures to mitigate these effects. In contrast, low-income countries experience a less detrimental impact; RCDF may even aid in integrating their DVCs into Global Value Chains, enhancing economic stability. It underscores the need for dynamic, adaptable policies and global collaboration to harmonize digital trade standards, thus offering guidance for policy-making in the context of an interconnected global economy.

Examining aid fragmentation and collaboration opportunities in Cambodia's health sector.

BACKGROUND: Cambodia's health sector faces significant challenges exacerbated by aid fragmentation, where development aid is dispersed among numerous small, uncoordinated projects. This study examines the distribution of health sector aid among Cambodia's principal donors to identify priorities, overlaps, and potential collaboration opportunities, addressing the urgent need for aid efficiency and alignment with national health priorities. METHODS: Utilizing OECD datasets and the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) for the years 2010-2021, this study quantifies aid fragmentation within Cambodia's health sector. It analyzes aid allocations from the top five donors-United States, Australia, South Korea, Japan, and Germany-across various health projects and initiatives, evaluating the extent of fragmentation and identifying areas for potential donor collaboration. RESULTS: This study's findings highlight a pervasive issue of aid fragmentation within Cambodia's health sector, evident through the sector's low HHI score. This indicates a widespread distribution of aid across numerous small-scale initiatives, rather than targeted, unified efforts. A notable example includes Japan and Korea, which exhibit lower HHI scores, indicating a more pronounced fragmentation in their aid allocation. These countries' contributions are spread across various sectors without a dominant focus, contrasting with the United States' significant dedication to infectious disease control. However, beyond this specific area, the US's aid distribution across other priority health areas shows signs of fragmentation. This scattered approach to aid allocation, even amidst instances of focused support, illustrates the overarching challenge of aligning donor contributions with the holistic needs of Cambodia's health infrastructure. CONCLUSIONS: This investigation highlights the critical need for enhanced collaboration and strategic harmonization among international donors to mitigate aid fragmentation in Cambodia's health sector. It underscores the importance of adopting integrated and priority-aligned aid strategies to improve the efficiency and impact of health aid. By fostering synergistic partnerships and harmonizing donor efforts, there is a potential to create a more cohesive support framework that resonates with Cambodia's comprehensive health requirements and contributes to sustainable health outcomes. Such harmonization not only aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 3 by optimizing health services and outcomes but also strengthens global partnerships under Sustainable Development Goal 17, fostering a unified approach to international development.

[The Soviet-Chinese cooperation in production of penicillin in the 1950s].

The article considers, on the basis of analysis of archival documents, issue of Soviet-Chinese cooperation in field of production of penicillin in the 1950s. The main attention is paid to history of construction of penicillin plant in Shijiazhuang. It is demonstrated that it was carried out on preferential terms for China and it was under special control of the USSR government. The building of plant was bound by great difficulties conditioned by range of project, specifics of production conditions in China, special requests of customer, necessity to manufacture non-standard equipment. The implementation of this project of enormous humanitarian significance was at the same time manifestation of concurrence between the USSR and the USA for geopolitical and ideological influence in East Asia.

Ethical and Practical Considerations for an Agreement to Ensure Equitable Vaccine Access Comment on "More Pain, More Gain! The Delivery of COVID-19 Vaccines and the Pharmaceutical Industry's Role in Widening the Access Gap".

This paper discusses the potential of an international agreement to ensure equitable vaccine distribution, addressing the failures witnessed during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVAX was unable to prevent vaccine monopolization and unequal distribution, which led to significant disparities in vaccination rates and avoidable deaths. Any future agreement on equitable vaccine distribution must address ethical and practical issues to ensure global health equity and access. The proposed agreement should recognize healthcare as a human right and consider vaccines beyond mere commodities, emphasizing the social responsibility of pharmaceutical companies to prioritize affordability, availability, and accessibility, particularly for low-income countries (LICs). Voluntary licensing agreements are suggested as a means to enhance access to essential medicines. The paper also outlines the necessity of international cooperation, with robust compliance mechanisms, to effectively enforce such an agreement and mitigate future health crises.

Comparison of Three Regional Medicines Regulatory Harmonisation Initiatives in Africa: Opportunities for Improvement and Alignment.

BACKGROUND: The African Medicines Regulatory Harmonisation (AMRH) Initiative was formed in 2009 and subsequently, three regional initiatives (East African Community Medicines Regulatory Harmonisation [MRH], Southern African Development Community [SADC]/ZaZiBoNa MRH, and the Economic Community of West Africa States MRH) were established. As these initiatives serve as a foundation for the African Medicines Agency (AMA), the aim of this study was to compare their operating models, successes and challenges to identify opportunities for improvement and alignment. METHODS: A mixed method approach was used for the data collection using a questionnaire, the Process, Effectiveness and Efficiency Rating (PEER), developed by the authors specifically for this study and semi-structured interview techniques. There were 23 study participants (one from each agency of the member countries of the three regions). It was hoped that data generated from this study would lead to a series of recommendations, which would then be ratified by the regulatory authorities. RESULTS: Most respondents stated that AMRH contributed to the strengthening of regulatory systems and harmonising regulatory requirements across economic regions of Africa, potentially resulting in improved access to quality-assured medicines. Although established at different times and at the discretion of each region, the marketing authorisation application review processes are largely similar, with a few differences noted in the eligibility and submission requirements, type of procedures employed, the timelines and fees payable. The challenges identified in the three regions are also similar, with the most noteworthy being the lack of a binding legal framework for regional approvals. CONCLUSION: In this study, we compared the process, successes and challenges of these three regional harmonisation initiatives in Africa addressing the areas of legal frameworks, information management systems, the accessibility and affordability of medicines and reliance that will bring greater alignment and efficiency in their operating models, thereby strengthening the foundation of the soon-to-be-operationalised AMA.

Enhancing Perspective in Global Health: A Case Study on an International Ophthalmology Partnership.

Introduction: Global ophthalmology opportunities are becoming increasingly popular, and international partnerships are becoming more common among academic training institutions in the United States. There is need for training in the complex relational, motivational, ethical, and logistical issues that may arise in these partnerships. Methods: We developed a 3-hour case-based session featuring four characters in a fictitious international ophthalmology partnership scenario. Facilitators used structured questions for each of the four parts to foster interaction and discussion among learners. After the activity, participants completed an evaluation/questionnaire consisting of Likert-scale and open-ended questions. Results: A total of 23 ophthalmology residents and seven medical students underwent the activity over four iterations. The activity was well received, with 100% of learners either strongly agreeing (90%) or agreeing (10%) when asked if the session was worthwhile and 100% of learners either strongly agreeing (87%) or agreeing (13%) when asked if the format was conducive to achieving the learning objectives. Answers to questions on how learners would change how they practice ophthalmology in their residency and in their future careers revolved around the following topics: consideration of other perspectives, humility, self- and situational awareness, complexities of partnerships, reciprocity and exchange, importance of communication, and connection of principles between international and domestic medical practice. Discussion: While this case study explores an international ophthalmology partnership scenario, the principles and themes presented can be applicable to other fields of medicine, and can be applicable to the practice of medicine both internationally and domestically.

Factors influencing the research impact in cancer research: a collaboration and knowledge network analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a major public health challenge globally. However, little is known about the evolution patterns of cancer research communities and the influencing factors of their research capacity and impact, which is affected not only by the social networks established through research collaboration but also by the knowledge networks in which the research projects are embedded. METHODS: The focus of this study was narrowed to a specific topic - 'synthetic lethality' - in cancer research. This field has seen vibrant growth and multidisciplinary collaboration in the past decade. Multi-level collaboration and knowledge networks were established and analysed on the basis of bibliometric data from 'synthetic lethality'-related cancer research papers. Negative binomial regression analysis was further applied to explore how node attributes within these networks, along with other potential factors, affected paper citations, which are widely accepted as proxies for assessing research capacity and impact. RESULTS: Our study revealed that the synthetic lethality-based cancer research field is characterized by a knowledge network with high integration, alongside a collaboration network exhibiting some clustering. We found significant correlations between certain factors and citation counts. Specifically, a leading status within the nation-level international collaboration network and industry involvement were both found to be significantly related to higher citations. In the individual-level collaboration networks, lead authors' degree centrality has an inverted U-shaped relationship with citations, while their structural holes exhibit a positive and significant effect. Within the knowledge network, however, only measures of structural holes have a positive and significant effect on the number of citations. CONCLUSIONS: To enhance cancer research capacity and impact, non-leading countries should take measures to enhance their international collaboration status. For early career researchers, increasing the number of collaborators seems to be more effective. University-industry cooperation should also be encouraged, enhancing the integration of human resources, technology, funding, research platforms and medical resources. Insights gained through this study also provide recommendations to researchers or administrators in designing future research directions from a knowledge network perspective. Focusing on unique issues especially interdisciplinary fields will improve output and influence their research work.

The place of health in the EU-CELAC interregional cooperation from 2005 to 2023: a historical, empirical and prospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Much has been said by actors from different fields and perspectives about the manifold changes in world affairs triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this context, it is to be expected that there will be impacts on long-standing partnerships such as the one between the European Union and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean Countries. However, few studies have demonstrated these impacts, either empirically, by uncovering their specificities or from a historical perspective, to allow for a reasonable methodological comparison of the patterns used to define the partnership and that have changed or have been affected in some way by the pandemic. RESULTS: Through an in-depth qualitative assessment of primary and secondary sources, this article contributes to this research gap. It analyzes the patterns and changes or impacts in light of two strands of behavior that can make sense of EU-CELAC health cooperation-revisionist or reformist. The findings show an economy-driven health agenda as a new pattern of cooperation, which derives from EU reformist behavior after the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The EU power to enforce its priorities in the context of health cooperation with CELAC is the main factor that will define how (and not just which) competing interests and capacities will be accommodated. The relevance of the study to the fields of global governance for health, interregional health cooperation and EU foreign policy is threefold. It shows us i.how two more international regimes are easily intertwined with health-trade and intellectual property-with the potential to deepen asymmetries and divergences even between long-standing strategic partners; ii.contrary to the idea that reformist behaviors are only adopted by actors who are dissatisfied with the status quo, the study shows us that the reformist actor can also be the one who has more material power and influence and who nevertheless challenges the success of cooperation in the name of new priorities and the means to achieve them; and iii.how the EU will find it difficult to operationalize its new priorities internally, among states and private actors, and with those of CELAC, given the history of intense disputes over health-related economic aspects.