Bioinformatics training on different scales - sharing knowledge and leveraging global connections

Bioinformatics training on different scales - sharing knowledge and leveraging global connections Report authors: Geert van Geest (SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics), Katharina F Heil (ELIXIR), Lisanna Paladin (EMBL), Melissa Burke (Australian BioCommons), Rolanda Julius (DS-I Africa, University of Cape Town) Session organisers: Alice Matimba (Wellcome Connecting Science), Dusanka Nikolic (Wellcome Connecting Science), Elif Naz Bingöl (APBioNET), Geert van Geest (SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics), Katharina F Heil (ELIXIR), Lisanna Paladin (EMBL), Melissa Burke (Australian BioCommons), Nicolas Palopoli (UNQ-CONICET & MetaDocencia), Patricia Carvajal (EMBL-EBI), Rolanda Julius (DS-I Africa, University of Cape Town), Vinicius Maracaja-Coutinho (Universidad de Chile) The Global Bioinformatics Education Summit (GBES) is an annual event that brings together the international bioinformatics education community to address global challenges in bioinformatics education. During the 2025 Global Bioinformatics Education Summit we convened a session to explore the opportunities and barriers presented by cross-regional collaboration in bioinformatics training and capacity building initiatives. Bioinformatics training and capacity building initiatives are often coordinated by organisations acting within a defined geographic region with approaches varying significantly across regions. Cross-regional collaboration brings opportunities for scaling bioinformatics training locally and globally. Development of collaborative activities requires regional coordination and navigation of challenges including sustainability, impact assessment, accessibility, finances, talent, time and resources (amongst others) as well as global alignment. Our session at the 2025 GBES aimed to foster exchange of best practices and experiences of cross-regional collaboration by: ● Exploring and collating examples of bioinformatics capacity building initiatives and cross-regional collaboration. ● Sharing models and strategies for training coordination and how they work at different regional levels. ● Identifying challenges, tools and strategies for effective cross-regional collaboration within bioinformatics training. We share the outputs of this session in the spirit of openness and in the hope that it will spark conversations about cross-regional collaboration in bioinformatics training. Outputs of the session To enable inclusion of participants across multiple geographical regions we used a mix of asynchronous participation and real-time discussion to address the above goals. Participants were invited to share their experiences of coordinating and collaborating on bioinformatics training by completing a community card (see the template below) and answering the questions: ● What is your community? ● How does it work? ● What is your region and scale? ● Do you collaborate with others across regions/scales? ● What lessons have you learned? Figure 1: Community card template used during the session Twenty-four cards were collated during the Summit from in-person, virtual and asynchronous participants (20 of these are shared with permission as a PDF in this Zenodo record and have been grouped based on scale, region and keywords). These included examples of bioinformatics training and capacity building initiatives from across the globe including North America, Europe, Asia, Latin America, Africa and Australia and at a scale ranging from within one/multiple institutions to national and global initiatives. These include communities that focus on bioinformatics, data science, open science, infrastructure and training. The cards highlighted the variety of activities being used to build capacity in bioinformatics including hands-on workshops, webinars, mentorship programs, collaborative tools and platforms, consultations, drop-in sessions, online (self-paced) tutorials, communities of practice, journal clubs and more. All of the cards included examples of collaboration highlighting that it is an essential ingredient (rather than optional extra) for bioinformatics training and capacity building activities. Live discussions during the session provided an opportunity to reflect on the stories shared in the cards, identify additional themes and collate common challenges and possible solutions which are summarised in the table on the next page. Participants reflected on the benefits of collaboration for improving the efficiency, accessibility, scalability and outcomes of training activities. They noted that to collaborate effectively it is important to nurture and support the networks of people involved, and to carefully consider the format of training and choice of technologies used to support interactions. Final thoughts and next steps The session at the GBES 2025 enabled knowledge-exchange on cross-regional collaboration from participants covering a wide range of geographical regions, scales and approaches. The session showed how challenges and solutions are often aligned no matter how large/small, local/regional/global a training effort is. This highlighted the importance of collaboration in delivery of training and collated challenges and practical solutions to enable these activities. The outputs of this session serve as a basis for initiating or strengthening cross-regional collaboration and can feed into future similar activities within the GBES and beyond, e.g. to develop train-the-trainer materials. This will help to ensure that coordination of collaborative bioinformatics training efforts across regions are informed by global best practices while remaining responsive to local needs. Table 1: Themes, common challenges and solutions discussed during the session Challenges Proposed Solutions Fragmented community: Compartmentalisation within regions and institutions leads to a lack of unified effort within the scientific community. Promote stronger networks and communication: Intentionally collaborating by promoting joint ventures or establishing regional consortia can overcome the challenges of compartmentalisation. Creating forums that involve industry and federal agencies can also help. Using agreed-upon communications channels like Slack is essential for the success of these initiatives. Financial constraints: Lack of dedicated budget for training impacts capacity to develop, deliver and improve the accessibility of training. Diversify and simplify funding processes: Solutions include industry sponsorship, advocating for inclusion of training in interdisciplinary grants, and simplifying administrative processes to enable funds to apply and use for training purposes. Accessibility and cost of training: Training programs are often not fully accessible or scalable. High fees can exclude participants, especially those with limited funding. There is a digital divide impacting access to infrastructure. Leverage virtual and distributed training models: Utilising virtual meetings, distributed workshops, recording materials, and holding regional events can overcome geographic challenges. Implementing virtual courses and providing printed training materials also enhances accessibility. Keeping fees low, offering tiered fees, bursaries, or waivers were also suggested. Advocating for improved financial aid. Access to infrastructure: This includes crucial elements like computing and storage resources, public transportation, reliable electricity, and internet connectivity. This is especially challenging in some regions. Encourage collaborative infrastructure development: Solutions include encouraging collaborations with international institutions or companies to share resources, and creating regional consortia to share computing and storage resources (e.g., a Latin American supercomputing cluster). Geographic and time zone barriers: Vast geographies make physical gatherings difficult, and differing time zones complicate virtual collaborations and training. Implement flexible planning for geographic challenges: Use tools to map time zones properly. Consider bringing training to the trainees through virtual meetings or distributed workshops. Language challenges: Varying languages among participants and regions can hinder cross-field collaboration and effective communication. Develop multi-language and contextualised training materials: Budgeting for translation, providing interpreted webinars, offering multi-language materials, and engaging in collective contextualisation initiatives are key. Lack of expertise and human resources: Challenges include professionals leaving their countries due to lack of support, limited local expertise, and a general unawareness of bioinformatics as a field. Strengthen capacity building and local expertise: This can be achieved by organising capacity-building events, introducing and expanding bioinformatics modules in early academia, increasing outreach to advertise the field, and implementing 'train-the-trainer' programs. Maintaining relevance and quality of training: Trainers need to keep up-to-date with constantly changing tools and landscapes, and there's a need to ensure effective learning and skill retention from courses. Ensure continuous feedback and updates for training content: Solutions involve continuously engaging users for feedback and integrating their insights into resource development, creating networks with regular meetings for trainers, and emphasising practical, hands-on training. Recognition and incentives for trainers/contributors: Voluntary contributions and the efforts of trainers are often not valued or recognised, making it hard to retain staff and encourage participation. Provide robust recognition and incentives: Mechanisms include offering certificates (e.g., after completing parts of a course), badges (e.g., on LinkedIn), recognition through career paths, and website/media visibility. Symbolic honorariums can also be considered. Institutional/political hurdles: Rivalry, political interests, and differing institutional policies (e.g. for data sharing) and priorities can make collaborations difficult and limit institutional support. Establish clear institutional agreements and engage policymakers: This includes defining clear policies about responsibilities, making agreements between institutions rather than individuals, and initiating conversations with governments about funding and coordination in research efforts.