22. Environmental Public Health and Emergency and Disaster Management

Author(s):  
Linda Young Landesman
Author(s):  
Mélissa Généreux ◽  
Marc Lafontaine ◽  
Angela Eykelbosh

Canada regularly faces environmental public health (EPH) disasters. Given the importance of evidence-based, risk-informed decision-making, we aimed to critically assess the integration of EPH expertise and research into each phase of disaster management. In-depth interviews were conducted with 23 leaders in disaster management from Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, and were complemented by other qualitative methods. Three topics were examined: governance, knowledge creation/translation, and related barriers/needs. Data were analyzed through a four-step content analysis. Six critical success factors emerged from the analysis: blending the best of traditional and modern approaches; fostering community engagement; cultivating relationships; investing in preparedness and recovery; putting knowledge into practice; and ensuring sufficient human and financial resources. Several promising knowledge-to-action strategies were also identified, including mentorship programs, communities of practice, advisory groups, systematized learning, and comprehensive repositories of tools and resources. There is no single roadmap to incorporate EPH expertise and research into disaster management. Our findings suggest that preparation for and management of EPH disaster risks requires effective long-term collaboration between science, policy, and EPH practitioners at all levels in order to facilitate coordinated and timely deployment of multi-sectoral/jurisdictional resources when and where they are most needed.


2009 ◽  
Vol 124 (6) ◽  
pp. 825-830 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Fitzgerald ◽  
Daniel Wartenberg ◽  
W. Douglas Thompson ◽  
Allison Houston

Objectives. We inventoried and reviewed the birth and fetal death certificates of all 50 U.S. states to identify nonstandard data items that are environmentally relevant, inexpensive to collect, and might enhance environmental public health tracking. Methods. We obtained online or requested by mail or telephone the birth certificate and fetal death record forms or formats from each state. Every state data element was compared to the 2003 standards promulgated by the National Center for Health Statistics to identify any items that are not included on the standard. We then evaluated these items for their utility in environmentally related analyses. Results. We found three data fields of potential interest. First, although every state included residence of mother at time of delivery on the birth certificate, only four states collected information on how long the mother had lived there. This item may be useful in that it could be used to assess and reduce misclassification of environmental exposures among women during pregnancy. Second, we found that father's address was listed on the birth certificates of eight states. This data field may be useful for defining paternal environmental exposures, especially in cases where the parents do not live together. Third, parental occupation was listed on the birth certificates of 15 states and may be useful for defining parental workplace exposures. Our findings were similar for fetal death records. Conclusion. If these data elements are accurate and well-reported, their addition to birth, fetal death, and other health records may aid in environmental public health tracking.


2011 ◽  
Vol 126 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3-6
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Portier

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raimi Morufu Olalekan ◽  
Aziba-anyam Gift Raimi ◽  
Teddy Charles Adias

Given the unprecedented novel nature and scale of coronavirus and the global nature of this public health crisis, which upended many public/environmental research norms almost overnight. However, with further waves of the virus expected and more pandemics anticipated. The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 opened our eyes to the ever-changing conditions and uncertainty that exists in our world today, particularly with regards to environmental and public health practices disruption. This paper explores environmental and public health evidence-based practices toward responding to Covid-19. A literature review tried to do a deep dive through the use of various search engines such as Mendeley, Research Gate, CAB Abstract, Google Scholar, Summon, PubMed, Scopus, Hinari, Dimension, OARE Abstract, SSRN, Academia search strategy toward retrieving research publications, “gray literature” as well as reports from expert working groups. To achieve enhanced population health, it is recommended to adopt widespread evidence-based strategies, particularly in this uncertain time. As only together can evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) can become a reality which include effective policies and practices, transparency and accountability of decisions, and equity outcomes; these are all more relevant in resource-constrained contexts, such as Nigeria. Effective and ethical EIDM though requires the production as well as use of high-quality evidence that are timely, appropriate and structured. One way to do so is through co-production. Co-production (or co-creation or co-design) of environmental/public health evidence considered as a key tool for addressing complex global crises such as the high risk of severe COVID-19 in different nations. A significant evidence-based component of environmental/public health (EBEPH) consist of decisions making based on best accessible, evidence that is peer-reviewed; using data as well as systematic information systems; community engagement in policy making; conducting sound evaluation; do a thorough program-planning frameworks; as well as disseminating what is being learned. As researchers, scientists, statisticians, journal editors, practitioners, as well as decision makers strive to improve population health, having a natural tendency toward scrutinizing the scientific literature aimed at novel research findings serving as the foundation for intervention as well as prevention programs. The main inspiration behind conducting research ought to be toward stimulating and collaborating appropriately on public/environmental health action. Hence, there is need for a “Plan B” of effective behavioral, environmental, social as well as systems interventions (BESSI) toward reducing transmission.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document