| Literature DB >> 35974981 |
Angelica Lopez Hernandez1, Jennifer L Weinberg2, Amena El-Harakeh3, Lola Adeyemi4, Neelima Potharaj5,6, Nandini Oomman7, Anna Kalbarczyk1.
Abstract
Background: Global health networks serve to bring members together towards a specific objective. However, for myriad reasons, women often lack access to networks that facilitate leadership and career development. In 2020, the Johns Hopkins Center for Global Health launched Emerging Women Leaders in Global Health (EDGE) with a virtual seminar series featuring diverse women leaders followed by an online networking space.Entities:
Keywords: Global Health; Social Network Analysis; Women’s Leadership
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35974981 PMCID: PMC9336789 DOI: 10.5334/aogh.3811
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Glob Health ISSN: 2214-9996 Impact factor: 3.640
Characteristics of the EDGE network by participant characteristics.
|
| ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| REGION OF THE WORLD | TYPE OF ORGANIZATION | CAREER STAGE | WHOLE NETWORK | |||||||||
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
| GLOBAL NORTH | GLOBAL SOUTH | UNIVERSITY/ACADEMIA | MULTILATERAL | NGO | PRIVATE SECTOR | GOVERNMENT | TRAINEE | EARLY PROFESSIONAL | MID PROFESSIONAL | SENIOR PROFESSIONAL | ||
|
| ||||||||||||
| Size (total number of connections) | 37 | 38 | 35 | 8 | 19 | 12 | 8 | 17 | 25 | 30 | 6 |
|
|
| ||||||||||||
| Degree (average number of individual connections) | 2.7 | 1.5 | 2.6 | 0.6 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 2.25 | 2 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 2.8 |
|
|
| ||||||||||||
| Betweenness | 0.89 | 0.44 | 0.933 | 0 | 0.25 | 0.12 | 0.14 | 0.32 | 0.39 | 0.59 | 0 |
|
|
| ||||||||||||
| Closeness | 0.18 | 0.16 | 0.20 | 0.15 | 0.16 | 0.17 | 0.19 | 0.18 | 0.20 | 0.19 | 0.21 |
|
|
| ||||||||||||
| Eigenvector | 0.63 | 0.29 | 0.63 | 0.05 | 0.13 | 0.05 | 0.013 | 0.26 | 0.32 | 0.35 | 0.05 |
|
|
| ||||||||||||
| Reach | 0.13 | 0.11 | 0.15 | 0.09 | 0.10 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.13 | 0.14 | 0.11 | 0.15 |
|
|
| ||||||||||||
| Value of each connection | 2.2 | 2.3 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 2.3 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2.9 | 5.0 |
|
|
| ||||||||||||
SNA Measures, Definitions, and Findings.
|
| ||
|---|---|---|
| MEASURE | DEFINITION | NETWORK MEANING/INTERPRETATION |
|
| ||
| Centrality | Measure of a node’s overall influence in the network Degree: a node’s number of connections Closeness: a node’s distance to other nodes Betweenness: a node’s frequency of location in the connection between two other nodes |
Nodes from the Global North and Global South have a similar number of local connections. Elements with high closeness like senior professionals are more visible and can spread information more easily. Elements from the Global North had a significantly higher betweenness than the Global South, and they act as key bridges/potential bottlenecks. |
|
| ||
| Eigenvector | A node’s connection to other well-connected nodes | Elements from academia in the Global North had the highest eigenvector, and they act as leaders of the network, however their local influence is low. |
|
| ||
| Reach | A portion of a network within two steps of an element | There were no significant differences in reach, meaning that nodes are generally more isolated and cannot affect change through friend-of-a-friend contact. |
|
| ||
Figure 1EDGE network’s centrality. Nodes with more influence provide access to decision-makers.