Coronaviruses ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saeed Khan ◽  
Tusha Sharma ◽  
Basu Dev Banerjee ◽  
Scotty Branch ◽  
Shea Harrelson

: Currently, Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has transformed into a severe public health crisis and wreaking havoc worldwide. The ongoing pandemic has exposed the public healthcare system's weaknesses and highlighted the urgent need for investments in scientific programs and policies. A comprehensive program utilizing the science and technologydriven strategies combined with well-resourced healthcare organizations appears to be essential for current and future outbreak management.


Author(s):  
Joshua M. Sharfstein

Firefighters fight fires. Police officers race to crime scenes, sirens blaring. And health officials? Health officials respond to crises. There are infectious disease crises, budget crises, environmental health crises, human resources crises—and many more. At such critical moments, what happens next really matters. A strong response can generate greater credibility and authority for a health agency and its leadership, while a bungled response can lead to humiliation and even resignation. Health officials must be able to manage and communicate effectively as emotions run high, communities become engaged, politicians lean in, and journalists circle. In popular imagination, leaders intuitively rise to the challenge of a crisis: Either they have what it takes or they do not. In fact, preparation is invaluable, and critical skills can be learned and practiced. Students and health officials alike can prepare not only to avoid catastrophe during crises, but to take advantage of new opportunities for health improvement. The Public Health Crisis Survival Guide provides historical perspective, managerial insight, and strategic guidance to help health officials at all levels not just survive but thrive in the most challenging of times.


2007 ◽  
Vol 97 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S93-S97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Regidor ◽  
Luis de la Fuente ◽  
Juan L. Gutiérrez-Fisac ◽  
Salvador de Mateo ◽  
Cruz Pascual ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Cummings

Public health communication makes extensive use of a linguistic formulation that will be called the “no evidence” statement. This is a written or spoken statement of the form “There is no evidence that P” where P stands for a proposition that typically describes a human health risk. Danger lurks in these expressions for the hearer or reader who is not logically perspicacious, as arguments that use them are only warranted under certain conditions. The extent to which members of the public are able to determine what those conditions are will be considered by examining data obtained from 879 subjects. The role of “no evidence” statements as cognitive heuristics in public health reasoning is considered.


2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 242-244
Author(s):  
Epari Venkata Rao ◽  
Prem Sagar Panda

Pandemics have significantly affected economy of each country. Health & political system have been also drastically affected in each part of the country. To fight against pandemic, it demands multidimensional approaches comprising of various measures like surveillance, containment, isolation & quarantine, border restriction as well as various socio-political and community measures. Though the entire health workforce is involved at multiple levels, the role of a community medicine/public health expert is maximum in controlling the spread in the community and managing the situation. The community medicine specialists can contribute to the public health as well as health-care services in combating the pandemic. This review has been done for giving an insight of proper utilisation of public health services and existing manpower of community medicine. Also this will channelize our health system and give a direction for combating future public health crisis.  So Government should utilise the experiences and expertise to manage the pandemic very well.


F1000Research ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giorgio Scita ◽  
Carmen Sorrentino ◽  
Andrea Boggio ◽  
David Hemenway ◽  
Andrea Ballabeni

Basic scientific research generates knowledge that has intrinsic value which is independent of future applications. Basic research may also lead to practical benefits, such as a new drug or diagnostic method.  Building on our previous study of basic biomedical and biological researchers at Harvard, we present findings from a new survey of similar scientists from three countries.  This survey asked about the scientists’ motivations, goals and perspectives along with their attitudes concerning  policies designed to increase both the practical (i.e. public health) benefits of basic research as well as their own personal satisfaction. Close to 900 basic investigators responded to the survey; results corroborate the main findings from the previous survey of Harvard scientists.  In addition, we find that most bioscientists disfavor present policies that require a discussion of the public health potential of their proposals in grants but generally favor softer policies aimed at increasing the quality of work and the potential practical benefits of basic research. In particular, bioscientists are generally supportive of those policies entailing the organization of more meetings between scientists and the general public, the organization of more academic discussion about the role of scientists in the society, and the implementation of a “basic bibliography” for each new approved drug.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document