scholarly journals Evidence-based information needs of public health workers: a systematized review

2017 ◽  
Vol 105 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Barr-Walker, MPH, MS
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Information Needs ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Reporting Practices ◽  
Public Health Workers ◽  
Definition Of

Objective: This study assessed public health workers’ evidence-based information needs, based on a review of the literature using a systematic search strategy. This study is based on a thesis project conducted as part of the author’s master’s in public health coursework and is considered a systematized review.Methods: Four databases were searched for English-language articles published between 2005 and 2015: PubMed, Web of Science, Library Literature & Information Science Index, and Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA). Studies were excluded if there was no primary data collection, the population in the study was not identified as public health workers, “information” was not defined according to specific criteria, or evidence-based information and public health workers were not the major focus. Studies included in the final analysis underwent data extraction, critical appraisal using CASP and STROBE checklists, and thematic analysis.Results: Thirty-three research studies were identified in the search, including twenty-one using quantitative methods and twelve using qualitative methods. Critical appraisal revealed many potential biases, particularly in the validity of research. Thematic analysis revealed five common themes: (1) definition of information needs, (2) current information-seeking behavior and use, (3) definition of evidence-based information, (4) barriers to information needs, and (5) public health–specific issues.Conclusions: Recommendations are given for how librarians can increase the use of evidence-based information in public health research, practice, and policy making. Further research using rigorous methodologies and transparent reporting practices in a wider variety of settings is needed to further evaluate public health workers’ information needs.

scholarly journals Working conditions and health status of 6,317 front line public health workers across five provinces in China during the COVID-19 epidemic: a cross-sectional study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinghua Li ◽  
Jingdong Xu ◽  
Huan Zhou ◽  
Hua You ◽  
Xiaohui Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Status ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Working Conditions ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Front Line ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Self Rated Health ◽  
Public Health Workers

ABSTRACT Background Public health workers at the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC) and primary health care institutes (PHIs) were among the main workers who implemented prevention, control, and containment measures. However, their efforts and health status have not been well documented. We aimed to investigate the working conditions and health status of front line public health workers in China during the COVID-19 epidemic. Methods Between 18 February and 1 March 2020, we conducted an online cross-sectional survey of 2,313 CDC workers and 4,004 PHI workers in five provinces across China experiencing different scales of COVID-19 epidemic. We surveyed all participants about their work conditions, roles, burdens, perceptions, mental health, and self-rated health using a self-constructed questionnaire and standardised measurements (i.e., Patient Health Questionnaire and General Anxiety Disorder scale). To examine the independent associations between working conditions and health outcomes, we used multivariate regression models controlling for potential confounders. Results The prevalence of depression, anxiety, and poor self-rated health was 21.3, 19.0, and 9.8%, respectively, among public health workers (27.1, 20.6, and 15.0% among CDC workers and 17.5, 17.9, and 6.8% among PHI workers). The majority (71.6%) made immense efforts in both field and non-field work. Nearly 20.0% have worked all night for more than 3 days, and 45.3% had worked throughout the Chinese New Year holiday. Three risk factors and two protective factors were found to be independently associated with all three health outcomes in our final multivariate models: working all night for >3 days (multivariate odds ratio [ORm]=1.67~1.75, p<0.001), concerns about infection at work (ORm=1.46~1.89, p<0.001), perceived troubles at work (ORm=1.10~1.28, p<0.001), initiating COVID-19 prevention work after January 23 (ORm=0.78~0.82, p=0.002~0.008), and ability to persist for > 1 month at the current work intensity (ORm=0.44~0.55, p<0.001). Conclusions Chinese public health workers made immense efforts and personal sacrifices to control the COVID-19 epidemic and faced the risk of mental health problems. Efforts are needed to improve the working conditions and health status of public health workers and thus maintain their morale and effectiveness during the fight against COVID-19.

E‐learning cultural competence for public health workers: A feasibility and pilot study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duckhee Chae ◽  
Yunekyong Kim ◽  
Jeeheon Ryu ◽  
Keiko Asami ◽  
Jaseon Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Cultural Competence ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
E Learning ◽  
Public Health Workers

A Qualitative Study of the COVID-19 Response Experiences of Public Health Workers in the United States

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Scales ◽  
Elizabeth Patrick ◽  
Kahler W. Stone ◽  
Kristina W. Kintziger ◽  
Meredith A. Jagger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Health Workers

Apathy and Ignorance: False Prophets of Autism and the Anti-Vaccine Movement

2020 ◽  
pp. 389-398
Author(s):  
Michael B. A. Oldstone
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Vaccination Rate ◽  
Personal Beliefs ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
False Reporting ◽  
The Face ◽  
Public Health Workers ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Brain

This chapter highlights the story of autism, the widespread acceptance of its incorrect cause, and the impact on use of vaccines, all stemming directly from deliberate, false reporting. The basic conflict is twofold. First, involvement of a scientific method that must be reproducible, be reliable, and possess substantial proof is in conflict with common/personal beliefs. Second, doctors, scientists, and public health workers, despite their mandate to listen to parents and patients concerning their opinions, must base medical conclusions on evidence that validates the outcome of each patient’s health issue. It is in this milieu that autism and the anti-vaccine groups still do battle. In 1998, Lancet, a usually respectable and reputable English journal, published Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s opinion that the measles, mumps, rubella (German measles) vaccine injected into the arms of children caused inflammation, leading to harmful chemicals entering the bloodstream through the gut (intestine). These factors, he said, traveled to the brain, where the harmful chemicals/toxins caused autism. In the face of this “fake news” about the source of autism and measles, the vaccination rate for measles dropped in the United Kingdom and Ireland.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document