Stakeholders’ assessment of US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s contributions to the development of National Public Health Institutes in seven countries

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahlet A. Woldetsadik ◽  
Kaitlin Fitzpatrick ◽  
Lisetta Del Castillo ◽  
Bridget Miller ◽  
Dennis Jarvis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
National Public Health ◽  
Centers For Disease Control ◽  
National Public Health Institutes

IANPHI and National Public Health Institutes

Public Health ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen Whitney ◽  
Katherine Seib ◽  
Jessica Blackburn ◽  
Jacob Clemente ◽  
Courtenay M. Dusenbury ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Health Programs ◽  
Public Health Programs ◽  
Public Health Systems ◽  
The World ◽  
National Public Health ◽  
Control And Prevention ◽  
National Public Health Institutes

More than one hundred countries around the world have established national public health institutes (NPHIs) to coordinate and lead their public health systems. Some NPHIs, such as the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), South African National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD), Brazilian Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), and Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, have developed over time. Others, such as the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), emanated in response to more recent global public health threats like severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). NPHI functionalities range from combatting primarily infectious diseases to comprehensive mandates to lead national efforts for prevention and control of both infectious and noncommunicable disease threats. The International Association of National Public Health Institutes (IANPHI), envisioned in 2001 and chartered in 2006, serves to link and catalyze the capacity of NPHIs around the world through a robust international professional and scientific network. IANPHI works closely with the World Health Organization (WHO) through a formal partnership agreement. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, member dues and peer assistance, bilateral cooperative agreements, and private-sector partnerships support its activities. IANPHI’s members encompass more than five billion people across six continents. IANPHI is the only organization whose mission is to strengthen national public health institutes. To do this, IANPHI’s work focuses on (a) supporting a robust scientific community of NPHI directors through an annual meeting, a listserv, and collaborative activities; (b) developing and distributing guidelines and tools that strengthen NPHIs’ abilities to conduct and evaluate public health programs and efforts, including the IANPHI NPHI development framework, the Staged Development Tool, NPHI-to-NPHI evaluation guidance, and a best practices series; and (c) investing in projects designed to create NPHIs and strengthen public health systems in low-resource countries. IANPHI helps NPHIs by advocating for strong and well-supported NPHIs and providing timely information and insights for public health programs and actions.

Communications and Politics

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua M. Sharfstein
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Accurate Information ◽  
Political Judgment ◽  
Political Leaders ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Control And Prevention ◽  
Public Health Officials ◽  
Centers For Disease Control

An effective communications approach starts with a basic dictum set forth by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: “Be first, be right, be credible.” Agencies must establish themselves as vital sources of accurate information to maintain the public’s trust. At the same time, public health officials must recognize that communications play out in the context of ideological debates, electoral rivalries, and other political considerations. During a public health crisis, this means that health officials often need to constructively engage political leaders in communications and management. Navigating these waters in the middle of a crisis can be treacherous. Figuring out the best way to engage elected leaders is a core aspect of political judgment.

Postexposure Interventions to Prevent Infection With HBV, HCV, or HIV, and Tetanus in People Wounded During Bombings and Other Mass Casualty Events—United States, 2008: Recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness

2008 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 150-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louisa E. Chapman ◽  
Ernest E. Sullivent ◽  
Lisa A. Grohskopf ◽  
Elise M. Beltrami ◽  
Joseph F. Perz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Emergency Response ◽  
Mass Casualty ◽  
Acute Injury ◽  
Mass Casualties ◽  
Public Health Preparedness ◽  
Mass Casualty Event ◽  
Public Health Officials ◽  
Centers For Disease Control

ABSTRACTPeople wounded during bombings or other events resulting in mass casualties or in conjunction with the resulting emergency response may be exposed to blood, body fluids, or tissue from other injured people and thus be at risk for bloodborne infections such as hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, human immunodeficiency virus, or tetanus. This report adapts existing general recommendations on the use of immunization and postexposure prophylaxis for tetanus and for occupational and nonoccupational exposures to bloodborne pathogens to the specific situation of a mass casualty event. Decisions regarding the implementation of prophylaxis are complex, and drawing parallels from existing guidelines is difficult. For any prophylactic intervention to be implemented effectively, guidance must be simple, straightforward, and logistically undemanding. Critical review during development of this guidance was provided by representatives of the National Association of County and City Health Officials, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, and representatives of the acute injury care, trauma, and emergency response medical communities participating in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Terrorism Injuries: Information, Dissemination and Exchange project. The recommendations contained in this report represent the consensus of US federal public health officials and reflect the experience and input of public health officials at all levels of government and the acute injury response community. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2008;2:150–165)

Aligning Public Health Training and Practice in Evaluation: Implications and Recommendations for Educators

2021 ◽  
pp. 237337992110336
Author(s):  
Bree L. Hemingway ◽  
Sarah Douville ◽  
Leslie A. Fierro
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
The United States ◽  
Evaluation Framework ◽  
Community Practice ◽  
Public Health Training ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Centers For Disease Control ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Objective. This study aimed to understand the extent to which master of public health (MPH) graduates engage in evaluation on the job, to learn how MPH graduates implement evaluation, and to hear from MPH graduates about how their academic training prepared them for the evaluation work they perform. Methods. Using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Evaluation Framework, this convergent mixed-methods study included an online survey with 89 public health practitioners and follow-up interviews with 17 survey respondents. The study was performed in the United States during summer 2020. Results. In addition to participating in evaluation activities related to all six Centers for Disease Control and Prevention framework steps, MPH graduates engage in evaluation capacity building, evaluating for health equity and social justice, and funding activities. Participants noted a disconnect between academic preparation and community practice, were least confident in focusing the evaluation design, and most often used surveys to collect data. Conclusions. Public health practitioners commonly engage in evaluation activities but do not feel fully prepared to do so given their MPH training. Many opportunities exist to enhance graduate/postgraduate training through connecting public health with the broader professional practice of evaluation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document