Co-Creation of Knowledge: A Community-Based Approach to Multilevel Dissemination of Health Information

2019 ◽  
pp. 152483991986522
Author(s):  
Kristin Monnard ◽  
Maureen R. Benjamins ◽  
Jana L. Hirschtick ◽  
Myles Castro ◽  
Pamela T. Roesch
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Public Health Data ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Community Residents ◽  
Survey Results ◽  
Planning Staff ◽  
Public Health Practitioners ◽  
Media Event

Background. Conventionally, public health researchers disseminate their work to peers via academic journals and conferences, with little emphasis on sharing results across sectors or with community members. To improve translation of health research into practice, it is essential to use a broader “solutions-focused” approach that includes strategic dissemination of findings. Methods. An urban research institute in Chicago, IL, leveraged knowledge transfer and community engagement principles to disseminate the results of a large, community-driven population health survey to a diverse set of stakeholders. We designed dissemination activities that (1) co-created knowledge by, for, and with communities; (2) shared survey results widely; and (3) minimized barriers to accessing and using public health data. Results. We tailored dissemination to specific audiences, including community residents, public health practitioners, and academic partners. We communicated key messages via various mechanisms, such as community forums, health profiles and videos, and a media event. Conclusions. With dedicated planning, staff, and funding, it is feasible for public health researchers to disseminate findings to diverse audiences using a community-engaged approach. To improve the capacity of public health practitioners in this critical skill, more examples of community-focused dissemination activities are warranted.

Conclusion

2019 ◽  
pp. 131-158
Author(s):  
Emily Mendenhall
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Social Life ◽  
The Body ◽  
Economic Insecurity ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Simple Argument ◽  
The Social ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

The conclusion returns to the simple argument that culture and experience fundamentally shape how diabetes is enacted cross-culturally. This chapter reflects upon the four ethnographic case studies and proposes five ways in which anthropologists and public health practitioners should "rethink diabetes." First, it argues that diabetes must be understood as a disease of poverty as opposed to exclusively one of modernization. Second, it argues that diabetes is always syndemic, especially when it confronts the complexity of economic insecurity. Third, diagnosis is perhaps the most influential feature of syndemic suffering, which reveals how diabetes itself is experienced completely differently in the body pre- and post-diagnosis. Fourth, the social life of diabetes contributes to fundamentally shifting what it means to have and live with diabetes across contexts. Finally, the conclusion suggests that interventions for diabetes should be employ syndemic thinking by working both upstream to address social policy and downstream to navigate clinical challenges and community-based solutions.

scholarly journals What makes a ‘successful’ collaborative research project between public health practitioners and academics? A mixed-methods review of funding applications submitted to a local intervention evaluation scheme

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter van der Graaf ◽  
Lindsay Blank ◽  
Eleanor Holding ◽  
Elizabeth Goyder
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Evaluation Scheme ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Abstract Background The national Public Health Practice Evaluation Scheme (PHPES) is a response-mode funded evaluation programme operated by the National Institute for Health Research School for Public Health Research (NIHR SPHR). The scheme enables public health professionals to work in partnership with SPHR researchers to conduct rigorous evaluations of their interventions. Our evaluation reviewed the learning from the first five years of PHPES (2013–2017) and how this was used to implement a revised scheme within the School. Methods We conducted a rapid review of applications and reports from 81 PHPES projects and sampled eight projects (including unfunded) to interview one researcher and one practitioner involved in each sampled project (n = 16) in order to identify factors that influence success of applications and effective delivery and dissemination of evaluations. Findings from the review and interviews were tested in an online survey with practitioners (applicants), researchers (principal investigators [PIs]) and PHPES panel members (n = 19) to explore the relative importance of these factors. Findings from the survey were synthesised and discussed for implications at a national workshop with wider stakeholders, including public members (n = 20). Results Strengths: PHPES provides much needed resources for evaluation which often are not available locally, and produces useful evidence to understand where a programme is not delivering, which can be used to formatively develop interventions. Weaknesses: Objectives of PHPES were too narrowly focused on (cost-)effectiveness of interventions, while practitioners also valued implementation studies and process evaluations. Opportunities: PHPES provided opportunities for novel/promising but less developed ideas. More funded time to develop a protocol and ensure feasibility of the intervention prior to application could increase intervention delivery success rates. Threats: There can be tensions between researchers and practitioners, for example, on the need to show the 'success’ of the intervention, on the use of existing research evidence, and the importance of generalisability of findings and of generating peer-reviewed publications. Conclusions The success of collaborative research projects between public health practitioners (PHP) and researchers can be improved by funders being mindful of tensions related to (1) the scope of collaborations, (2) local versus national impact, and (3) increasing inequalities in access to funding. Our study and comparisons with related funding schemes demonstrate how these tensions can be successfully resolved.

Measuring the Efficacy of a Pilot Public Health Intervention for Engaging Communities of Puerto Rico to Rapidly Write Hurricane Protection Plans

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Mark E. Keim ◽  
Laura A. Runnels ◽  
Alexander P. Lovallo ◽  
Margarita Pagan Medina ◽  
Eduardo Roman Rosa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Puerto Rico ◽  
User Satisfaction ◽  
National Guard ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Public Health Intervention ◽  
Health Intervention ◽  
Project Work ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based

Abstract Objective: The efficacy is measured for a public health intervention related to community-based planning for population protection measures (PPMs; ie, shelter-in-place and evacuation). Design: This is a mixed (qualitative and quantitative) prospective study of intervention efficacy, measured in terms of usability related to effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction, and degree of community engagement. Setting: Two municipalities in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico are included. Participants: Community members consisting of individuals; traditional leaders; federal, territorial, and municipal emergency managers; municipal mayors; National Guard; territorial departments of education, health, housing, public works, and transportation; health care; police; Emergency Medical Services; faith-based organizations; nongovernmental organizations (NGOs); and the private sector. Intervention: The intervention included four community convenings: one for risk communication; two for plan-writing; and one tabletop exercise (TTX). This study analyzed data collected from the project work plan; participant rosters; participant surveys; workshop outputs; and focus group interviews. Main Outcome Measures: Efficacy was measured in terms of ISO 9241-11, an international standard for usability that includes effectiveness, efficiency, user satisfaction, and “freedom from risk” among users. Degree of engagement was considered an indicator of “freedom from risk,” measurable through workshop attendance. Results: Two separate communities drafted and exercised ~60-page-long population protection plans, each within 14.5 hours. Plan-writing workshops completed 100% of plan objectives and activities. Efficiency rates were nearly the same in both communities. Interviews and surveys indicated high degrees of community satisfaction. Engagement was consistent among community members and variable among governmental officials. Conclusions: Frontline communities have successfully demonstrated the ability to understand the environmental health hazards in their own community; rapidly write consensus-based plans for PPMs; participate in an objective-based TTX; and perform these activities in a bi-lingual setting. This intervention appears to be efficacious for public use in the rapid development of community-based PPMs.

scholarly journals After Action Review of the 2019 measles outbreak in Clark County, Washington, U.S.A

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Stoto ◽  
R Piltch-Loeb ◽  
R Wolfe ◽  
R Albrandt ◽  
A Melnick
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Religious Community ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Mutual Aid ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Clark County ◽  
After Action Review ◽  
Measles Outbreak ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Abstract Issue Clark County experienced a measles outbreak that challenged public health authorities. Description of the practice: We conducted a formal After Action Review with state and local health officials, school officials, and others to identify lessons for public health practitioners facing future outbreaks. Results Following the early identification of measles in a child who had recently arrived from Ukraine, active surveillance identified 71 confirmed cases, most in unvaccinated persons under 18 years of age. 4,138 contacts were traced and public health personnel made daily monitoring calls to 816. 53 potential exposure sites in healthcare facilities, schools and other public places were identified and communicated to the public. As a social distancing measure, unvaccinated students, teachers, and staff were excluded from schools in which exposure had occurred. Ascertaining susceptibility status was challenging. The national anti-vaccination sentiment and a parallel outbreak in a New York religious community created challenges in representing community risk while avoiding stigmatization of a community in which the first reported case was identified. Rather than respond to every false claim on social media, the health department developed talking points about emerging issues and engaged the community in dialogue. Lessons Responding to the measles outbreak required innovative approaches to surveillance and contact tracing, social distancing (school exclusions), and emergency risk communication. The response required extensive coordinated efforts of the county and state health departments, school systems, and many other organizations. Mutual aid enabled an influx of resources but managing the surge of responders proved challenging. Key messages Public health emergencies require effective emergency management practices. Carefully conducted After Action Reviews of health emergencies can help public health practitioners identify challenges and innovative practices.

Characterizing the acceptability of a vaccine for West Nile virus by public health practitioners

Vaccine ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (19) ◽  
pp. 3423-3427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tasha Epp ◽  
Shannon Waldner ◽  
Judith Wright ◽  
Phil Curry ◽  
Hugh G. Townsend ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
West Nile Virus ◽  
West Nile ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Revisiting the Importance of Risk Communication for Public Health Practitioners

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul L. Knechtges ◽  
Gregory D. Kearney ◽  
Stephanie L. Richards
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

scholarly journals Aging clinical problems: a difficult balance between age and frailty

2016 ◽  
Vol 84 (1-2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Renzo Rozzini
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Weight Loss ◽  
Elevated Risk ◽  
Geriatric Syndrome ◽  
Central Focus ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
And Function ◽  
Public Health Practitioners ◽  
Clinical Problems

<p>Frailty is a common geriatric syndrome that embodies an elevated risk of catastrophic declines in health and function among older adults. Frailty is a condition associated with ageing with associated weakness, slowing, decreased energy, lower activity, and, when severe, unintended weight loss. As a population ages, a central focus of geriatricians and public health practitioners is to understand, and then beneficially intervene on, the factors and processes that put elders at such risk, especially the increased vulnerability to stressors (e.g. extremes of heat and cold, infection, injury, or even changes in medication) that characterizes many older adults. The syndrome of geriatric frailty is hypothesized to reflect impairments in the regulation of multiple physiologic systems, embodying a lack of resilience to physiologic challenges and thus elevated risk for a range of deleterious endpoints. The empirical assessment of geriatric frailty in individuals seeks to capture this or related features.</p><p><strong>Riassunto</strong></p><p>Fragilità è la predisposizione alla rottura, al danno. L’etimologia della parola fragilità da "frango", rompere, rimanda alla nozione di qualche cosa che se sottoposto a una pressione, a un impatto, rischia di danneggiarsi facilmente. E’ dunque una nozione ampia e intuitiva che può avere ambiti di precisazione più diversi a seconda che se ne parli in fisica (dove esistono dei coefficienti esatti) piuttosto che nei campi della morale o del sentimento, dove la valutazione sarà sempre più "poetica" e affidata alla sensibilità individuale.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document