over 250 Master's degree scholarships of £10,000 at King's College London

full information and original link here.

King's Master's Support Scheme 2015-16

We are delighted to announce that for this year only, up to 273 new awards of £10,000 will be available to students looking to pursue master’s study in 2015. These awards are exclusively aimed at widening access to postgraduate study and are joint-funded by the Higher Education Funding Council (HEFCE) and King’s.

Check you meet the eligibility criteria

To be eligible for the award you will need to meet the following criteria:

1. Be a UK or EU citizen;
2. Have been classified as ‘Home fee’ status for your chosen Master’s programme at King’s;
3. Have begun your Undergraduate Degree (UG) in September 2012 or later and been charged higher fee levels at a UK university;*
4. Have completed your UG degree during the 2014-2015 academic year;
5. Must not already hold a master’s degree or higher level of qualification;**
6. Have received, and are able to evidence for your final year of UG study:
   • a Student Finance England/N. Ireland/Wales/ SAAS maintenance grant 
   OR
   • a special support grant awarded by Student Finance England/N. Ireland/Wales/ SAAS 
   OR• another form of means-tested financial support (e.g. a means-tested grant from a charitable foundation, university or other public sector body);
7. Had a household income of less than £42,620 p.a. in your final year of UG study;
8. Meet the terms of the offer for your chosen master’s degree programme at King’s College London;
9. Must have completed an online application for any King's master's programme (except Dietetics and Physiotherapy pre-registration)*** starting in September 2015, by the application deadline (16.00 BST on Friday 29th May 2015);
10. Must have submitted a complete scholarship application by the application deadline (tbc).

*UK University refers to any Higher Education Institution in England supported by HEFCE or a University in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland which has charged the student higher fees for being from other UK regions.   https://www.hefce.ac.uk/   

**   Students who already hold a master’s degree or higher are not eligible for this funding but students who have undertaken prior postgraduate study such as PG Diplomas or PG Certificates, are eligible. Students undertaking MRes programmes comprised of taught modules are eligible, whereas students undertaking MRes programmes for which a majority of the degree is based on independent research and is categorised as a research degree are not.

*** includes LLM, MA, MSc, MMUS, MClinDent, MPH and MRes. Does not include  PG Cert, PG Dip or PGCE.

Application process

Please check your eligibility carefully before applying.

Applications are now open and will close at 16:00 BST on Friday 29th May 2015.

In order to be considered for the award, you must:

  1)     Have submitted a complete online admissions application for a postgraduate master's programme at King’s College London before the application deadline.

Admissions applications must be ‘complete’ in order for an application to be considered for funding, and for an admissions application to be deemed ‘complete’ it must contain all the relevant supporting documentation, such as references, transcripts, and English language scores, where applicable. It is your responsibility to ensure that all supporting materials are submitted to King’s by the funding deadline.* 

AND 

2) Submit a specific online scholarship application before the application deadline, together with the required supporting documentation.

Failure to submit both application forms and the supporting documentation by the deadline will result in the application being considered ineligible. 

*If you have already applied for admissions, or hold a place but deferred entry to 2015/16, you will not be required to submit an admissions application again.

Supporting documentation

You will be required to submit supporting documentation which will demonstrate you meet the eligibility criteria as follows:

A) You will be asked to provide evidence to confirm that you were paying the higher tuition fee rate (£6,000 - £9,000 per year), either in the form of a funding letter, tuition fee invoice or similar documentation from your undergraduate university. 

B) If you received a Student Finance England/N. Ireland/Wales/ SAASmaintenance grant, or a special support grant awarded by Student Finance England/N. Ireland/Wales/ SAAS then you will be required to submit the following:

• all pages of your Student Finance England/N. Ireland/Wales/SAAS entitlement letter for your final undergraduate academic year (e.g. 2014/2015) showing any support awards. This document must contain your name for verification purposes. If you cannot find a copy of the document please access your on-line student finance account to download or print off another copy.

C) If you received another form of means-tested financial support (e.g., such as a means-tested grant from a charitable foundation, university or other public sector body) then you will be required to submit the following:

• a copy of a P60 or a statement of earnings from HMRC for the 2014/15 tax year, along with the full documentation used for the funders financial assessment AND full details of the award provided.

D) If you have you spent time in Local Authority Care, Kinship Care or received support from the Foyer Federation, you will be required to provide Local Authority (or equivalent) confirmation of the exact dates spent in care or similar confirmation from the Foyer Federation.

E) If you have a recognised disability for which you received a Disabled Student Allowance (DSA)from Student Finance England/N. Ireland/Wales/SAAS, you will be required to provide Student Finance England/N. Ireland/Wales/SAAS correspondence confirming DSA entitlement.

F) If, during 2014 or 2015, you have been in receipt of a Carer’s Allowancebecause you have caring responsibilities for an ill or disabled family member, you will be required to provide evidence that you are in receipt of a Carer’s Allowance or a notification letter from your Local Authority.

If you have any queries about this scheme, please refer to the FAQs page in the first instance.

 

Why not watch our postgraduate funding webinar  for an overview on what scholarships are available, what to do before you apply for a scholarship and for answers to some frequently asked questions?

TTIP and global health. Panel event at Royal Society of Medicine #globalhealth

Original posting can be found here.

global health alert: the trans-atlantic trade and investment negotiations - what's the fuss about?

Date	Tuesday 23 September 2014 Evening
Venue	Royal Society of Medicine 1 Wimpole Street LONDON W1G 0AE
Organised by	Global Health , Medact and Faculty of Public Health
Accreditation	CPD - Applied for

about this event

This lecture is organised by RSM Global Health, Medact and the Faculty of Public Health.

The United States and the European Union are currently engaged in negotiations to
establish a new trade and investment agreement with each other. This is set to
become one of the biggest such agreements – encompassing the world’s two
largest economic unions. 

The scope of the negotiations is extremely broad; and covers issues such as
environmental, food and occupational safety; public procurement policy; and the
application of commercial law to public services such as the NHS. Just about
everything covered in the negotiations will have an impact (direct and
indirect) on human and environmental health and on the NHS.

The RSM, Medact and the Faculty of Public Health have teamed up to bring together a range of trade, public health and investment experts to inform doctors and
other health professionals about this vitally important issue.

This evening meeting  will describe the broad scope of the negotiations;
highlight the key concerns (with a focus on health) and examine the argument
that the negotiations will lead to economic growth and development in Europe
that will benefit everyone.

Hear from the experts, debate the issues and engage in discussion about how the
health community can ensure that the negotiations promote and protect health.

If you are concerned or involved in any of these areas then please join us on 23
September 2014.

• food, chemical, occupational and consumer safety
• intellectual property rights, including those that affect the price of medicines
• banking governance and the flow of finance capital
• public procurement
• the duties and powers of the state to shape and regulate their health systems
• cross-border flow of peoples

The panel of speakers include:

John Hilary, Director, War on Want

Dr Gabriel Siles-Brugge, Lecturer in politics, University of Manchester 

Nick Dearden, Director, World Development Movement

Sue Davies, Chief Policy Adviser on Food, Which? 

The evening discussion will be chaired by Dr Sridhar Venkatapuram, Lecturer in Global Health, Kings College London and Medact Trustee

If you have any difficulties in registering, please contact globalhealth@rsm.ac.uk, 0207 290 3904

Political Science in Global Health - Call for Papers #globalhealth

Original post found here

Special Issue, “Political Science in Global Health”- Call for Papers

– SEPTEMBER 3, 2014POSTED IN: UNCATEGORIZED

“Political Science in Global Health”
Special Issue of Global Health Governance

Guest Editor:
Eduardo J. Gómez, PhD
King’s College London

The application of political science theory and method to the study of global health is a
relatively new area of scholarly research. While political scientists have a long track record
of studying the health policy-making process in the United States and other advanced
industrialized nations, political scientists have only recently investigated the international
and domestic politics of health policy change in developing nations and multilateral
organizations (e.g., the United Nations and the World Bank). In recent years, other political
scientists have explored the domestic and international security aspects of global health.
This recent interest is mainly reflective of the fact that in the field of Comparative Politics
and International Relations, health politics and policy have not been at the forefront of
scholarly research; rather, and understandably so, the study of comparative
democratization, electoral systems, ethnic and social conflict in the field of Comparative
Politics, as well as international security, inter-state negotiations and conflict in
International Relations has been of greater concern. And yet, recent seminal contributions
to the field of comparative and international health politics and policy have kindled political
scientists’ interests in the topic.

The goal of this special issue of Global Health Governance is to analyze the progress that the
political science community has made in the area of global health governance, to explain
why political scientists should be interested in this field, and to consider new areas of
scholarly research.

This series also strives to underscore the importance of undertaking multidisciplinary
research in global health. Of particular importance is addressing the sustained divide
between the political science and public health communities. Some political scientists for
example are concerned about lack of interest in political science approaches to global health
in mainstream public health journals. On the other hand, we wish to address why political
scientists have failed to engage the public health scholarly community and other broader
global health forums.

With this in mind, this special series seeks submissions of research articles addressing the
following two themes and questions:

I. Where are we? And why does global health matter?

For this section of the special series, scholars will address the progress that the
political science community has made in better explaining and understanding international and domestic health politics and policy. For example, articles may
address the following research questions:

a) What new insights have been achieved through the application of
political science theory to global health research?

b) What new empirical challenges and needs have been raised through this
approach to global health?

c) What may be the limitations of the political science approach and how
can other theoretical/methodological approaches be combined with political
science to better understand and explain global health politics/policy?

II. Exploring New Areas of Scholarly Research

In this section, scholars will submit articles addressing new areas of research in
the fields of political science and global health. For example, some may wish to
explore the processes of government response to neglected diseases, such as
cancer, diabetes, malnutrition, obesity, as well as areas of controversial scientific
inquiry, such as stem cell research. Alternatively, some may be interested in
proposing new comparative methodologies and/or theories for better analyzing
the international and domestic politics of global health. Authors may consider
one or more health issues as well as one or more country case studies.

Those interested in contributing must submit abstracts to the guest editor Eduardo J.
Gómez (Eduardo.gomez@kcl.ac.uk) and cc (ghgovernance@gmail.com) by October 1, 2014.
The guest editor will review the abstracts and make decisions by October 15. Authors
whose abstracts are accepted will be invited to submit full manuscripts, which are due by
February 15, 2015. The manuscripts must be uploaded on the Global Health Governance
submission website, which can be found at the following website:
http://mc04.manuscriptcentral.com/ghgj

When submitting your abstracts, please make sure to indicate that you are submitting it to a
special GHG journal series, by including in the subject line “Political Science and Global
Health Special GHG Journal Series.”

Please limit the word count of your submission to 3,000-5,000 words. After the February 15
deadline, all manuscripts will be internally reviewed. Those articles selected will then be
sent out for peer review. Authors will be notified of a decision by April 1, 2015. Revisions to
manuscripts will need to be sent back by May 1, with the goal of publishing the articles in
June, 2015.

If you have any further questions, please contact the Guest Editor for this special series at
Eduardo.gomez@kcl.ac.uk.

Very best wishes and we look forward to receiving your submission.

How “Global” is “Global Health”? The Diversity of Global Health 'Thinkers'

From the journal Global Health Governance.  Original page here.

How “Global” is “Global Health”? Examining the Geographical Diversity of Global Health Thinkers

– JUNE 16, 2014POSTED IN: FALL 2013 ISSUE

 Tess van der Rijt and Tikki Pang

Many health issues are transnational in nature and cannot be contained within national borders. Global health is therefore an area of study and  research that should involve the collective opinions and ideas of diverse global health thinkers. This paper poses the question: how “global” is ”global  health”? Through an analysis of four different contributors shaping global health, including academics, journals, health institutions and presenters at  global health conferences, this paper aims to determine if the development of global health is truly global. The paper concludes that global health is not  being shaped by those who are most affected by it; the majority of people influencing and defining global health priorities represent institutions based in the developed world. A number of trends and opportunities are identified and recommendations are made to ameliorate the observed imbalance.

Have your say on the treatment gap in global mental health

Have your say on the treatment gap in global mental health Posted: 19 Jun 2014 04:50 AM PDT by Victoria de Menil and Valentina Iemmi Lord Crisp chairing the APPG on global mental health (c) Victoria de Menil An historic first took place in Portcullis House on 10 June. The UK All Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) on global health and mental health convened a joint hearing to discuss global mental health. The event, chaired by Lord Nigel Crisp together with James Morris MP, was the first of two oral evidence sessions to address the question of whether the UK government should be “doing more or doing differently” to address the treatment gap in global mental health. Three additional Parliamentarians, Meg Hillier MP, Vicount Eccles and Peter Bottomley MP, were also in attendance. The session opened with evidence from three speakers: Professor Vikram Patel of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Professor Graham Thornicroft of the Institute of Psychiatry, and Dr Gary Belkin, director of New York University’s Global Mental Health Programme. Their task was to answer two questions: how significant a problem is mental illness in low- and middle-income countries; and what evidence is there for cost-effective ways to address mental health needs in low- and middle-income countries? Startling statistics Vikram Patel highlighted a few startling statistics. Suicide kills more young women globally than maternal causes. Furthermore, the life expectancy of people with schizophrenia is 15-20 years shorter than the general population. Finally, mental disorders are the cause of one-quarter of years lived with disability globally, which places it above cardiac disease and cancer in terms of disability. Equally noteworthy, however, was a positive scenario: if maternal depression were eliminated, then 25% of childhood stunting and malnourishment would disappear in South Asia. Professor Patel also emphasised the timeliness of this hearing and cited four changes that make today an opportune time to invest in mental health: 1.       The WHO has issued a new Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan that establishes an international consensus on priorities and solutions in addressing the gap; 2.       Middle-income countries such as Brazil, India and China have increased public investments in mental health care and need technical support to make best use of those funds; 3.       In spring 2015, the World Bank will devote a session to mental health within its annual finance meeting; 4.       Evidence has emerged that appropriately trained and supervised non-specialist health workers can deliver mental health treatments successfully, which Vikram Patel deemed one of the most exciting innovations for mental health care in years. Fear of contagion Graham Thornicroft’s specialty is stigma, and he recounted how an Ethiopian nurse did not want to touch the case notes of a patient with mental illness for fear of contamination. Many individuals say that stigma and social exclusion are more painful than the primary symptoms of their condition. Reporting findings from the INDIGO study, Professor Thornicroft explained that some individuals internalize stigma and stop trying to make friends or find jobs. However, the evidence suggests the best antidote to stigma is personal contact. What gap? Professor Patel corrected a common myth that there is no mental health treatment in low- and middle-income countries: “We shouldn’t assume that people aren’t getting treatment. They are getting treatment, but they are getting the wrong treatment.” Most people with a common mental disorder in India are prescribed sleeping medicines (benzodiazepines) and vitamins. Professor Thornicroft is also likely to have shocked more than one person in the public with an image of the shackled feet of a mentally ill person who had been “treated” with hyenas by a traditional healer in Somalia. The gap for mental health care is not for any treatment, but for evidence-based treatment. Professor Thornicroft quantified the gap, pointing out that low- and middle-income countries are not the only ones with this problem. Whereas in the UK treatment is available for one-third of people with mental disorders (varying by illness type), only 10% of people access evidence-based treatmentsin low- and middle-income countries. Diagram for root-cause analysis presented by Dr Belkin (c) Victoria de Menil Gary Belkin spoke in absolute terms about the gap, estimating it to be “one billion minds and lives” – the name of a project he is working on with the Institute for Healthcare Improvement. He believes that to tackle a problem of that scale requires standardized quality improvement tools. The Billion Minds and Lives project is expected to test a set of quality improvement tools in large-scale projects in Ghana, Kenya, Ethiopia, Zambia and Rwanda. In a show-and-tell moment, Dr Belkin projected a large image of what is cryptically known as a “fishbone diagram for root-cause analysis,” a group problem-solving technique that maps proximate and underlying causes of a problem. The outcome – a meaningful mess of squares and arrows (see photo) – was observed by several audience members to capture the true complexity of factors at play in addressing mental health problems. Dr Belkin closed with a rousing invocation to the British government to take action: “The only people that can make this change happen are governments.” He advised a two-way approach to scaling up mental healthcare: “Take mental health with you when you go out; and bring others in.” In other words, mental health policy makers need to branch out to non-mental health arenas, such as the G8, and also to bring non-specialist actors, such as schools and primary care providers, into the discussion about mental health. Voices of dissent The hearing was not without controversy. When it opened up for questions, a service user said he had heard that outcomes for schizophrenia were better in low- and middle-income countries and asked whether that was related to their taking less antipsychotics or to being less isolated. Professor Patel responded that the claim that outcomes are better in developing countries is based on a single study conducted by the WHO 25 years ago. All studies conducted locally since then have demonstrated the contrary. He stated firmly, “The life expectancy of someone with schizophrenia in India is half that in England – I see that as a bad outcome.” Derek Summerfield, a psychiatrist of South African origin affiliated with the Institute of Psychiatry, challenged the speakers, particularly Professor Thornicroft, declaring that it was “slick and facile” to say that stigma is the reason people in low-income countries don’t seek services. He argued that they don’t seek services because they live in absolute poverty and are struggling to survive. They don’t have depression, they have poverty. He called the desire to spread mental healthcare globally a “new imperialism.” In response to Dr Summerfield, Professor Patel stated,“What Dr. Summerfield is pointing out is failures in our Western medical system, and I wish him and his colleagues the best of luck in sorting that out. What we are concerned with is the mental health systems in the rest of the world.” Professor Thornicroft agreed with Dr Summerfield that poverty is central to mental health problems in low-income countries and that the two problems should ideally be addressed in tandem. He cited the work of BasicNeeds as exemplary of this two-pronged approach to tackling health and poverty. Lord Crisp closed the debate by inviting Dr Summerfield to “tell us what you think we should do as parliamentarians – and not just to avoid mental health.” The second parliamentary hearing will be held on 7 July 2014. Lord Crisp is asking for all relevant evidence addressing the question of what parliamentarians should do to address the mental health treatment gap ahead of the second session. So now is your chance to have your say in the UK government’s response to global mental health. To contribute evidence or register to attend the second session, email Jonty Roland. For more on the proceedings of global mental health hearings on Twitter, follow @APPGGlobHealth, @ThornicroftG, @abillionminds About the authors Victoria de Menil is a PhD Student within the Personal Social Services Research Unit at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Valentina Iemmi is Research Officer within the Personal Social Services Research Unit at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Lancet Oslo Commission on Global Governance for Health Report

Find the articles on theLancet.com here.

The Lancet—University of Oslo Commission on Global Governance for Health

The political origins of health inequity: prospects for change

Published February 11, 2014

Executive summary

Despite large gains in health over the past few decades, the distribution of health risks worldwide remains extremely and unacceptably uneven. Although the health sector has a crucial role in addressing health inequalities, its efforts often come into conflict with powerful global actors in pursuit of other interests such as protection of national security, safeguarding of sovereignty, or economic goals. This report examines power disparities and dynamics across a range of policy areas that affect health and that require improved global governance: economic crises and austerity measures, knowledge and intellectual property, foreign investment treaties, food security, transnational corporate activity, irregular migration, and violent conflict.

Comment

Protecting health: the global challenge for capitalism

Richard Horton, Selina Lo

Full Text | PDF

The political origins of health inequity: the perspective of the Youth Commission on Global Governance for Health

Unni Gopinathan, Cristóbal Cuadrado, Nick Watts, Renzo R Guinto, Daniel Hougendobler, Waruguru Wanjau, Alexandre Lefebvre, Jacob Jorem, Xiaoxiao Jiang, Nilofer Khan Habibullah, Saveetha Meganathan, Usman Ahmad Mushtaq

Full Text | PDF

The Lancet Commission

The political origins of health inequity: prospects for change

Ole Petter Ottersen, Jashodhara Dasgupta, Chantal Blouin, Paulo Buss, Virasakdi Chongsuvivatwong, Julio Frenk, Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Bience P Gawanas, Rita Giacaman, John Gyapong, Jennifer Leaning, Michael Marmot, Desmond McNeill, Gertrude I Mongella, Nkosana Moyo, Sigrun Møgedal, Ayanda Ntsaluba, Gorik Ooms, Espen Bjertness, Ann Louise Lie, Suerie Moon, Sidsel Roalkvam, Kristin I Sandberg, Inger B Scheel

Full Text | PDF

MSc + PhD Fellowships Global health and social justice Deadline 31 Jan 2014

King's College London 

MSc / PhD in Global Health & Social Justice

Applications for this programme entry 2014 are now open.
MSc + PhD  Fellowships (ESRC & AHRC) deadline January 31st 2014  

Who is the programme for?

The growing movement for global health seeks to address inequalities in health, disease, disability and medical care internationally. This innovative MSc / Phd programme is designed for those seeking high-level skills in the critical analysis of the drivers of global health inequalities, the politics, practices and ethics of the global health movement and the efficacy of alternative approaches.

The MSc in Global Health and Social Justice is ideal for health professionals, policy makers and shapers, those who work in governmental and non-governmental organizations, and anyone wishing to develop a more rigorous understanding of the field. It builds capacity for critically assessing the practices required to address global health from the perspective of social justice.

The PhD programme in Global Health and Social Justice is for outstanding candidates who seek to push forward the boundaries of knowledge in regard to the empirical or ethical aspects of global health and health justice.  Single as well multi-disciplinary approaches are welcomed.  Philosophical research can include the philosophy of human rights, health and social/global justice, theories of justice, health inequalities, causation and justice, and so forth.

Why does it matter?

The appalling inequities in mortality, disease, disability, and medical care between and within countries as well as global regions result from a complex mix of social, economic and political factors. Medical and health care advances are often extending the healthy lives of the wealthy few, yet millions sicken and die for want of basic health and social facilities, often hampered by ineffective and non-responsive political systems.  The increasing acknowledgement of social determinants of health move the scope of analysis and action much beyond medicine and healthcare policy.

From the World Health Organization to multiple NGOs, global pharmaceutical companies and the new generation of philanthropists, the global health movement is growing. It is challenged by a variety of grass roots movements that start from different premises and advocate very different practices of intervention. Improving global health requires a new generation of individuals who understand the many complex dimensions of health, healthcare, and global institutions and processes as well as who can reason ethically about the many difficult moral dilemmas present.

What is unique about this programme?

- An emphasis on social/global justice and the development of key critical skills for analysis, research, policy development and the ethical assessment of health and disease inequalities.

- Taught by internationally recognised experts within a world-leading Department of Social Science, Health and Medicine, drawing on the unrivaled strength of King’s College London across disciplines including sociology, anthropology, cultural geography, gerontology, political philosophy, ethics and political science.

- Provides the opportunity for advanced social science analysis of key issues, such as psychiatry and mental health, ageing, war and trauma, pharmaceuticals, pandemics and biosecurity, and the political economy of health.

-Builds on the Department’s close collaboration with the King’s Centre for Global Health and the King’s Regional Institutes, particularly Brazil, China and India.

- Taught in the heart of London, at the Strand Campus on the banks of the Thames, with immediate access to organizations and agencies relevant to global health and to London’s key cultural activities.

Funding opportunities?  

ESRC Funding  (31st January 2014 deadline)  MSc / MSc + PhD

THE King’s Interdisciplinary Social Science Doctoral Training Centre (KISS-DTC) is awarding a number of ESRC-funded postgraduate research studentships to support doctoral research and training in the social sciences at King’s, for students starting from September 2014.

The deadline for the next round (for funding to commence Sept/Oct 2014) of studentships is 17:00 GMT 31 January 2014. Please note that this deadline is absolute.

Studentships for the 2014-15 academic year are available for +3 doctoral studentships, and for 1+3 Masters and PhD studentships. For more information on eligibility and how to apply, please visit the relevant page.

Successful UK nationals or residents of 3 or more years will receive full funding.
Successful EU nationals will have fees covered, and may receive additional stipends.

AHRC Funding (31st January 2014 deadline)  PhD 3+

The London Arts and Humanities Partnership (LAHP) is pleased to invite applications from outstanding candidates for AHRC/LAHP Doctoral Training Awards for 2014-15 entry.

Up to 80 studentships are available for postgraduate research students studying Arts & Humanities subjects at King's College London. This funding includes work in the fields of history, philosophy, ethics, political science and international relations. Full details can be found on the KCL Graduate School Website;

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/study/pg/funding/sources/ahrc.aspx

Successful UK nationals or residents of 3 or more years will receive full funding.
Successful EU nationals will have fees covered, and may receive additional stipends.

Wellcome Trust  Ethics & Society PhD Studentship

Next deadline 2 April 2014

http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/Funding/Society-and-ethics/funding-schemes/Doctoral-Studentships/index.htm 

King's Funding Database

The College's Graduate Funding Database also has more details of funding schemes which you may be able to apply for.

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/graduate/funding/database/

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/study/pg/school/funding.aspx

For other funding opportunities and general queries related to studentships and doctoral places, please see the KCL graduate school website:http://www.kcl.ac.uk/study/pg/school/index.aspx

Alternative Funding guide
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/study/pg/funding/sources/alt.aspx

Funding graduate studies in the UK
http://www.prospects.ac.uk/funding_postgraduate_study.htm

How do I find out more?

For more information contact sridhar.venkatapuram@kcl.ac.uk

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/sshm/study/globalhealth.aspx

The most important infographic in global health

Find the original source on wired.com here

This is the most important infographic and image in global health right now.

I usually do not write commentary on this blog, preferring to just reblog.  However, this image is hugely important.  Other people have found this image, including Bill Gates's twitter feed.  Which is unlikely to have been sent by him, and largely misses the importance of this image.

The value of DALYs, which this infographic is based on, is that it seeks to measure the loss of life years across all human beings (humanity) due to premature death and morbidity.  It has many controversial aspects that are still open for debate, and it is often used in cost-effective analysis which is also questionable.  However, the really exciting thing about DALYs, and the important aspect of the work of the Institute of Health Metrics at the University of Washington, is that they make concrete the amorphous notion of suffering of the global poor/third world/ global health.  If want to know the GDP of a country, there are measurements that all feed into one number.  If you want to know a nation's debt, there is a number.  But if you wanted to know what a country's health looks like, or the health of all human beings in the world, there was no number, no picture.

This is the first image that I have seen that truly makes concrete how much of human lives are lost because of premature mortality and morbidity.  It also identifies the causes.  And, now, we can start a more informed global public discussion about what are the causes, how much will healthcare solve this problem, and how much do we have to go beyond healthcare and health systems to reduce this loss of human life years.  Once you understand that a preventable loss of a year of life is the preventable loss of one human being's ability to live a life they would like, the question of justice comes to the forefront.

Other people just see a list of diseases and lack of healthcare.  That is a real shame.

Want to Save Lives? You Need a Map of What’s Doing Us In

• BY LEE SIMMONS
• 11.15.13
• 9:30 AM

If sorrow were a landscape, here’s how it would look from a cruising altitude of 30,000 feet. This graphic maps the global cost of early mortality—some 1.7 billionyears of human life forfeited annually—sorted by cause of death. That’s 1.7 billion years of harvests and weddings, of factory work and music lessons and novels and new ideas that were supposed to happen and now won’t.

Infographic by Thomas Porostocky  |  Source: Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation

And get this: Worldwide, about 40 percent of that toll results from disorders (shown in yellow above) that could be avoided with basic medications, clean water, and neonatal care. As you read this, 3,000 young kids are dying from diarrhea that a few zinc tablets might have stopped. Cost: 38 cents per life.

You might wish you hadn’t read that. But it’s the kind of insight that policymakers and NGOs need in order to focus health resources where they can do the most good. That’s why the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the Univer­sity of Washington created the massive database on which this graphic is based. Known as the Global Burden of Disease, it quantifies the incidence and impact of every conceiv­able illness and injury. Want to see your own odds of dying from gunshot or animal attack? You can go to the GBD Compare website and find out.

But IHME doesn’t just tally up death rates, it estimates the years of life lost (YLLs) from all those deaths: A fatal pneumonia infection at age 3 erases many more future birthdays than a heart attack at 80. Adding in years lived with disability, the database provides the most comprehensive measure we have of the burden of disease, in terms of lost human potential. It’s not a pretty picture.

Luckily, policymakers are paying attention. Well-targeted campaigns are reducing mortality from infectious diseases and birth complications throughout the world (as shown by the light shading in the picture above). While more than a million people still die of malaria each year, mostly children in sub-Saharan Africa, that number is down more than 20 percent since 2005.

These are just a few of the insights offered by GBD Compare. The interactive
visualization tool lets you drill down on that global map to compare regions and countries, spot trends, or slice the data by demographic groups. And because the data is structured hierarchically, you can set the resolution to zoom in for more detail or zoom out for big-picture comparisons. The basic inter­face is easy to use, but there’s a helpful video tutorial if you want to dig deeper into the toolbox.

Here are are few screenshots from the website itself. Don’t be thrown by the different color scheme; the “tree map” layout is basically the same as in the artist’s rendering above. The labels are a bit cryptic here, but if you visit the site you can run your cursor over the map to see full descriptive info for every tile.