Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 80
Filter
1.
Milbank Q ; 101(S1): 637-652, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37096604

ABSTRACT

Policy Points The US public heath infrastructure is in disrepair and building a sustainable system is the central challenge for the nation. Doing so in a highly patrician environment is the mission for the next ten years.


Subject(s)
Public Health Administration , Public Health , Forecasting
2.
3.
Am J Public Health ; 113(1): 5, 2023 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36413705
5.
Am J Public Health ; 112(S6): S574-S575, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35977330
7.
Rev Panam Salud Publica ; 46, 2022. Special Issue Emergency Preparedness in the Americas
Article in Spanish | PAHO-IRIS | ID: phr-56239

ABSTRACT

[EXTRACT]. Este editorial presenta un suplemento especial que contiene artículos con una perspectiva representativa de la preparación para emergencias en distintas partes de América Latina. Los artículos abarcan tres temas principales: el impacto de la pandemia en los países, la respuesta desde la perspectiva de las funciones esenciales de la salud pública y la transformación digital necesaria para mejorar la resiliencia de los sistemas de salud. Para facilitar el acceso a la información en este suplemento, todos los artículos se publican en inglés en la American Journal of Public Health y en español en la Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergencies , Americas
10.
Am J Public Health ; 112(4): 613-614, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35319949

Subject(s)
Public Health , Humans
13.
Am J Public Health ; 111(10): 1710, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34623884
14.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 27(Suppl 6): S218-S219, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34559738
15.
J Urban Health ; 98(Suppl 1): 51-59, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34480328

ABSTRACT

The inclusion of social determinants of health offers a more comprehensive lens to fully appreciate and effectively address health. However, decision-makers across sectors still struggle to appropriately recognise and act upon these determinants, as illustrated by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Consequently, improving the health of populations remains challenging. This paper seeks to draw insights from the literature to better understand decision-making processes affecting health and the potential to integrate data on social determinants. We summarised commonly cited conceptual approaches across all stages of the policy process, from agenda-setting to evaluation. Nine conceptual approaches were identified, including two frameworks, two models and five theories. From across the selected literature, it became clear that the context, the actors and the type of the health issue are critical variables in decision-making for health, a process that by nature is a dynamic and adaptable one. The majority of these conceptual approaches implicitly suggest a possible role for data on social determinants of health in decision-making. We suggest two main avenues to make the link more explicit: the use of data in giving health problems the appropriate visibility and credibility they require and the use of social determinants of health as a broader framing to more effectively attract the attention of a diverse group of decision-makers with the power to allocate resources. Social determinants of health present opportunities for decision-making, which can target modifiable factors influencing health-i.e. interventions to improve or reduce risks to population health. Future work is needed to build on this review and propose an improved, people-centred and evidence-informed decision-making tool that strongly and explicitly integrates data on social determinants of health.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Social Determinants of Health , Health Policy , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
16.
J Urban Health ; 98(Suppl 1): 60-68, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34435262

ABSTRACT

Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) represent a significant global public health burden. As more countries experience both epidemiologic transition and increasing urbanization, it is clear that we need approaches to mitigate the growing burden of NCDs. Large and growing urban environments play an important role in shaping risk factors that influence NCDs, pointing to the ineluctable need to engage sectors beyond the health sector in these settings if we are to improve health. By way of one example, the transportation sector plays a critical role in building and sustaining health outcomes in urban environments in general and in megacities in particular. We conducted a qualitative comparative case study design. We compared Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) policies in 3 megacities-Lagos (Africa), Bogotá (South America), and Beijing (Asia). We examined the extent to which data on the social determinants of health, equity considerations, and multisectoral approaches were incorporated into local politics and the decision-making processes surrounding BRT. We found that all three megacities paid inadequate attention to health in their agenda-setting, despite having considerable healthy transportation policies in principle. BRT system policies have the opportunity to improve lifestyle choices for NCDs through a focus on safe, affordable, and effective forms of transportation. There are opportunities to improve decision-making for health by involving more available data for health, building on existing infrastructures, building stronger political leadership and commitments, and establishing formal frameworks to improve multisectoral collaborations within megacities. Future research will benefit from addressing the political and bureaucratic processes of using health data when designing public transportation services, the political and social obstacles involved, and the cross-national lessons that can be learned from other megacities.


Subject(s)
Noncommunicable Diseases , Population Health , Cities , Health Policy , Humans , Nigeria , Noncommunicable Diseases/epidemiology , Transportation
20.
AMA J Ethics ; 23(2): E189-195, 2021 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33635200

ABSTRACT

Following the US Civil War, newly freed Black Americans had significantly poorer health than Whites. Founded in 1865, the Freedmen's Bureau offered a range of support (eg, food, health care, shelter, legal aid) to try to improve health among the newly freed. The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the persistence of racial health inequity in American life. Ethical obligations to address it exist now, just as they did in 1865.


Subject(s)
Black or African American , Healthcare Disparities/history , Minority Health/history , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/ethnology , History, 19th Century , History, 20th Century , Humans , Public Health/ethics , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...