ArticleBMC medical education2025
Strengthening public health education and humanitarian response through academic volunteerism.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVolunteers are an integral part of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent (RCRC) Movement, with over 16 million people actively contributing to humanitarian action worldwide. Academic volunteerism within the Movement includes contributions from students, volunteers and professionals from academic institutions who offer their time and expertise. In this study we aimed to understand the process of embedding academic volunteers in humanitarian organizations such as the Canadian Red Cross (CRC) and assess the impact of their activities within the realm of public health education.
methodsWe used a qualitative case study design with an instrumental approach. All documents related to academic volunteers within the CRC database from September 2018 to August 2023 were gathered and reviewed. Data related to the processes around engaging with volunteers, timelines, outcomes and feedback surveys from students and staff members were extracted and a content analysis was conducted. A return-on-investment analysis (ROI) was conducted to assess the financial impact of engaging academic volunteers.
resultsA total of 68 academic volunteers were engaged with CRC, including unpaid or partially paid master's students, doctoral and postdoctoral fellows, and student volunteers. The collaboration between CRC and academic volunteers contributed to educational enrichment, professional development, knowledge transfer, operational efficiency, and talent pool expansion. Results from a survey on academic volunteerism further highlighted benefits such as maintaining project schedules, promoting diversity, and amplifying the Movement's voice on important matters. The return on investment for unpaid academic volunteers and Masters students was 70%. A five-fold increase was measured for partially paid academic volunteers resulting in 486% ROI. DISCUSSION: Academic volunteerism yields mutual benefits for students, academic researchers, and humanitarian organizations. These volunteers enhance operational efficiency and fortify resilience, fostering adaptability amid challenges. They play a crucial role in strengthening evidence-based programming within organizations like CRC and bolstering their capacity to address emerging health issues. These volunteers constitute a valuable talent pool, bringing organizational knowledge and experience to the table. They provide critical support for scaling up programs, especially during emergency situations, offering innovative solutions to address human resource shortages driven by funding constraints.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.