Background: Since the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, the number of international students in the United States had been gradually increasing. However, the total numbers have begun to decrease since 2019–2020 school year due to the Trump administration's policy and COVID-19. Still, little is known about how international students’ psychological adjustment and well-being have been affected by changing nonimmigrant visa policy and the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We conducted a total of 34 online semi-structured in-depth interviews with international students from 18 countries of origin studying in the San Francisco Bay Area, California. More than 60% of the participants (21 out of 34) were aged 21 to 25. Among our 34 participants, gender and 18 were male and 16 were female, and 19 were undergraduate students and 15 were master’s students. The majority of the participants were first-generation college students (22/34, 64.71%). Verbatim transcription was done for all interviews. NVivo was used for both deductive and inductive approaches to the qualitative analysis. Results: Overall, the recent political climate negatively impacted participants’ psychology of adjustment and well-being. July 6, 2020 Policy Directive for international students caused severe uncertainty about whether they can continue studying in the United States. There were many resources or services needed to overcome this period, such as extended mental and emotional support from the counseling services as well as financial and informational support from the international student office and university. Although international students had the benefit of the university's food assistance program, they were not eligible to receive any external support outside of the university and financial aid at the local and federal levels. Whether maintaining F-1 visa status was one of their major concerns. Due to COVID-19, job opportunities were limited, which made international students difficult to obtain Curricular Practical Training (CPT) and secure a job in the United States within the 90-day unemployment limit of Optical Practical Training (OPT). H-1B visa and permanent residency were other challenges to go through, but participants saw positive perspectives from the Biden administration. Conclusions: Uncertain policy changes due to COVID-19 and presidential transitions impacted international students’ psychological well-being and adjustment. International students are important populations in the United States who have supported jobs that are high in demand and economically contributed to the United States. It is expected that future policies at various levels support international students’ life and improve their health equity and mental health.

Engaging key populations, including gender and sexual minorities, is essential to meeting global targets for reducing new HIV infections and improving the HIV continuum of care. Negative attitudes toward gender and sexual minorities serve as a barrier to political will and effective programming for HIV health services. The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), established in 2003, provided Gender and Sexual Diversity Trainings for 2,825 participants including PEPFAR staff and program implementers, U.S. government staff, and local stakeholders in 38 countries. The outcomes of these one-day trainings were evaluated among a subset of participants using a mixed methods pre- and post-training study design. Findings suggest that sustainable decreases in negative attitudes toward gender and sexual minorities are achievable with a one-day training.

At present, over 215 million people live outside their countries of birth, many of which are referred to as diaspora—those that live in host countries but maintain strong sentimental and material links with their countries of origin, their homelands. The critical shortage of Human Resources for Health (HRH) in many developing countries remains a barrier to attaining their health system goals. Usage of medical diaspora can be one way to meet this need. A growing number of policy-makers have come to acknowledge that medical diaspora can play a vital role in the development of their homeland’s health workforce capacity. To date, no inventory of low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) medical diaspora organizations has been done. This paper intends to develop an inventory that is as complete as possible, of the names of the LMIC medical diaspora organizations in the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia and addresses their interests and roles in building the health system of their country of origin. The researchers utilized six steps for their research methodology: (1) development of rationale for choosing the four destination countries (the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia); (2) identification of low- and middle-income countries (LMIC); (3) web search for the name of LMIC medical diaspora organization in the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia through the search engines of PubMed, Scopus, Google, Google Scholar, and LexisNexis; (4) development of inclusion and exclusion criteria and creation of a medical diaspora organizations’ inventory list (Table 1) and corresponding maps (Figures 1, 2, and 3). Using decision criteria, reviewers narrowed the number to a final 89 organizations; (5) synthesis of information to collect the general as well as the unique roles the medical diaspora organizations play in building health systems; and (6) developing inventory of respective LMIC governments’ diaspora offices (Table 2) to identify units/departments that facilitate diaspora’s work. In total, the authors found 89 medical diaspora organizations in 4 main countries: in the United States of America 60, in the United Kingdom 24, in Australia 3, and in Canada 2. These medical diaspora organizations tend to have three focuses: providing healthcare services, training, and when needed humanitarian aid to their home country; creating a social or professional network of migrant physicians (i.e., simply to bring together people with an ethnic and professional commonality) and; supplying improved and culturally sensitive healthcare to the migrant population within the host country. Sixty-eight LMIC countries have established a diaspora office within their government office. It is also equally important to note that many policy-makers may lack knowledge of models for medical diaspora engagement or of valuable lessons learned by other governments about working with diaspora. The medical diaspora remains an underutilized resource in both health systems policy formulation and program implementation.

Malaria was the leading cause of post-neonatal deaths in Mozambique in 2017. The use of insecticide treated nets (ITNs) is recognized as one of the most effective ways to reduce malaria mortality in children. No previous analyses have estimated changes in mortality attributable to the scale-up of ITNs, accounting for provincial differences in mortality rates and coverage of health interventions. Based upon annual provincial ownership coverage of ITNs, the Lives Saved Tool (LiST), a multi-cause mathematical model, estimated under-5 lives saved attributable to increased household ITN coverage in 10 provinces of Mozambique between 2012 and 2018, and projected lives saved from 2019 to 2025 if 2018 coverage levels are sustained. An estimated 14,040 under-5 child deaths were averted between 2012 and 2018. If 2018 coverage levels are maintained until 2025, an additional 33,277 child deaths could be avoided. If coverage reaches at least 85% in all ten provinces by 2022, then a projected 36,063 child lives can be saved. From 2012 to 2018, the estimated number of lives saved was highest in Zambezia and Tete provinces. Increases in ITN coverage can save a substantial number of child lives in Mozambique. Without continued investment, thousands of avoidable child deaths will occur.

Objective: To address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and its relevant political climate on college-level international students in the United States. Participants: International students aged 18 years and older in the San Francisco Bay Area. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional survey using PHQ-9 and the GAD-7. Results: The prevalence of depression and anxiety significantly decreased during the last two weeks from the survey completion in April or May in 2021 (Time 2) as compared to the two weeks after the July 6th policy directive in 2020 (Time 1). However, both depression severity, 2.172 (95% CI: 1.900, 2.445), and anxiety severity, 1.897 (95% CI: 1.655, 2.138), during Time 2 were still mild, indicating the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic had still negatively impacted their mental health status. Conclusions: Future research can expand the target population and analyze the long-term effects of policy changes and disease outbreaks on international students in the United States.