Going out to a remote country and helping people directly yourself, while you live with them and are integrated with their lives, might give you a sense of connection and meaning[0], but EA would likely dictate that this is a pretty ineffective use of your time, since you're probably much better at things like $YOUR_CAREER than you are at directly helping people in remote countries with their problems. So you should instead do $YOUR_CAREER, make money and donate it to people who can help others more directly, with perhaps a less personal touch (more "mass distributing mosquito nets", less "helping individual families with issues").
[0]: Of course if you're completely ineffective, you might not feel good about it. But I think the level of effectiveness required to make you feel good is much, much lower than the optimal levels of effectiveness that EA is shooting for.
Definitely something to consider. For a long time, I justified my actions with a combination of "well, I'm doing good with the money", "if I didn't do this, someone else would so quitting doesn't accomplish anything", and "unlike a narrative protagonist, I don't have the capability to change the world".
If you want to save or improve 10 lives, do that. It doesn't matter if there are millions of people still starving. You still made the incremental change that you wanted to