Capacitación para Campaña de Vacunación Encuentro 5

El encuentro con pediatras y médicos generalistas en vista de la campaña de seguimiento de sarampión y rubeola

Informe de rotación electiva

El presente informe recupera la experiencia de trabajo y los aprendizajes alcanzados durante el proceso de rotación electiva en el tercer año de la Residencia Interdisciplinaria de Educación y Promoción de la Salud (RIEPS). En el mismo se presentan los objetivos de rotación, las actividades realizadas y se describen los principales aprendizajes y conclusiones. La rotación electiva tuvo lugar en el Área de Epidemiología dependiente del Servicio de Clínica Médica del Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires y se desarrolló por un periodo de tres meses, desde el 02 de mayo al 29 de julio del 2022. (AU)

Will Podcasting and Social Media Replace Journals and Traditional Science Communication? No, but...

The digital world in which we live is changing rapidly. The evolving media environment is having a direct impact on traditional forms of communication and knowledge translation in public health and epidemiology. Openly accessible digital media can be used to reach a broader and more diverse audience of trainees, scientists, and the lay public than can traditional forms of scientific communication. The new digital landscape for delivering content is vast, and new platforms are continuously being added. In this article, we focus on several, including Twitter and podcasting, and discuss their relevance to epidemiology and science communication. We highlight 3 key reasons why we think epidemiologists should be engaging with these mediums: 1) science communication, 2) career advancement, and 3) development of a community and public service. Other positive and negative consequences of engaging in these forms of new media are also discussed. The authors of this commentary are all engaged in social media and podcasting for scientific communication, and we reflect on our experiences with these mediums as tools to advance the field of epidemiology.

Reacting to crises: The COVID-19 impact on biostatistics/epidemiology.

Most crises, though difficult and challenging to address, offer opportunities for change and for development of new perspectives or approaches to deal with traditional strategies. The reaction to and the managing of the COVID-19 pandemic has provided a platform for evaluating how we quantify disease prevalence, incidence, time courses and sequellae as well as how well we plan, design, analyze and interpret health care associated data, including clinical trials and electronic medical records and health claims data. Whether the Covid-19 crisis provides opportunities to advance the fields of biostatistics and epidemiology in select ways remains to be seen. This article describes three areas of crises experienced by the author during a career in the regulation of pharmaceutical products and how they were responded to. Some suggestions for potential future opportunities in reaction to the Covid-19 crises are provided.

Strengthening Applied Epidemiology in West Africa: Progress, Gaps, and Advancing a Regional Strategy to Improve Health Security.

The ability to prevent, promptly detect, and appropriately respond to a public health threat is essential for health security. Field epidemiology training has helped increase the quality and quantity of the public health workforce to strengthen disease surveillance, outbreak preparedness and response, and general public health capacity. We conducted a desk review on the status of the Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program model in 16 countries in West Africa. We also developed a questionnaire and shared it with West African Health Organization (WAHO) member states to document their experiences and the status of training in their countries. WAHO organized a regional 3-day consultative meeting with major stakeholders in the region to examine progress, gaps, and challenges, and outline a roadmap to strengthen the Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program. Stakeholders shared their experiences, engaged in discussions to identify strengths and gaps, and made plans on a way forward. Member states are at different levels of implementing field epidemiology and laboratory training programs in their countries, and, therefore, major gaps remain in the number and distribution of trained epidemiologists throughout West Africa. Member states implement different variants of the program and in some instances the same cadre of health workers are trained in different but comparable programs with different funding streams. Two member states had not begun implementing the training program. Developing regional centers of excellence was recommended in the long term while collaboration among member states to train the required number of epidemiologists to fill the acute needs could be helpful in the short and medium term. Curriculum harmonization and expansion, deployment and use of trained epidemiologists, accreditation of training institutions, and generation of indigenous funding streams are recommended to improve the Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program in West Africa.

Informe de Rotación Electiva

El presente informe tiene la intención de dar cuenta de las actividades desarrolladas y aprendizajes en el marco de la Rotación Electiva en la Residencia de Epidemiología del Ministerio de Salud de la Nación Argentina. La institución se encuentra en la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, siendo de dependencia nacional. Los objetivos generales de la rotación fueron adquirir los conocimientos y herramientas de la epidemiología en la Salud Pública, y conocer las principales actividades que se desarrollan en la Dirección Nacional de Epidemiología. (AU)

Improving Diversity and Promoting Inclusion in the Society for Epidemiologic Research Through Choice of Conference Location.

Scientific conferences provide attendees opportunities to network, share research, learn new skills and ideas, and initiate collaborations. Conference attendance is especially important for students and early-career researchers who are establishing their research careers or looking for jobs. However, attending conferences can be expensive, and the high cost of conference attendance might hit students and early-career researchers the hardest. According to a new member survey from the Society for Epidemiologic Research, early-career members are more racially and ethnically diverse than senior members, meaning that reducing financial barriers to conference participation might be an important consideration for increasing diversity among conference attendees. In this commentary, we discuss how choice of conference location-choosing less expensive cities nearer to more Society for Epidemiologic Research members-could reduce financial and other barriers to conference attendance for all members and improve diversity and inclusion in the Society.

Epidemiologists Count: The Role of Diversity and Inclusion in the Field of Epidemiology.

We present interpretations of the idea that "epidemiologists count" in response to the current status of membership and diversity and inclusion efforts within the Society for Epidemiological Research (SER). We review whom epidemiologists count to describe the (mis)representation of SER membership and how categorizations of people reflect social constructions of identity and biases that exist in broader society. We argue that what epidemiologists count-how diversity and inclusion are operationalized-has real-world implications on institutional norms and how inclusive/non-inclusive environments are. Finally, we examine which epidemiologists count within the field and argue that inclusion can only be achieved when we address how resources and opportunities are distributed among epidemiologists. To improve diversity and inclusion within SER and beyond, we recommend that SER strengthen its commitment to diversity, inclusion, and equity by: 1) integrating this priority on all agendas; 2) enhancing efforts to improve self-awareness among members and accountability within the organization; 3) supporting the growth of a diversifying workforce in epidemiology; and 4) increasing the visibility of health disparities research and researchers in epidemiology.

Food for Thought: Opportunities to Improve Diversity, Inclusion, Representation, and Participation in Epidemiology.

DeVilbiss et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2020;189(10):998-1010) have taken on the noble and worthy cause of improving diversity, inclusion, representation, and participation across the Society for Epidemiologic Research (SER) membership-a reflection/microcosm of society. The objective of this commentary is to underscore the importance of diversity and to offer initiative ideas, which should be centered around inequity stemming from the widespread historical and contemporary maldistribution of power (e.g., decision-making) and resources (e.g., funding) within institutions and organizations. Nonexhaustive strategies could include SER becoming an opportunity and information hub that helps to fill resource gaps. It is also recommended that SER leadership learn from existing associations and scientific initiatives to improve the culture of science in general by equitably incorporating policy, systems, and environmental interventions throughout the career spectrum. Examples include the provision of tools and incentives to address explicit or implicit biases, enhance mentoring skills, and remove predictable barriers (e.g., financial). Explicitly labeling diversity/inclusion efforts should be avoided, and the initiative should be evaluated based on impact rather than intent. Our fates are interconnected, and we can all help increase diversity, inclusion, representation, and participation to improve our science in hopes of equitably improving public health.

You're From Where, Again? A Critical Assessment of Institutional Diversity in the Society for Epidemiologic Research.

The Society for Epidemiologic Research (SER) has recently taken laudable steps toward increasing diversity, equity, and inclusion within the society, including participation in the annual meeting. In this essay, we argue that there is one critical piece of the diversity and inclusion equation that is, however, overlooked: institution. At the 2019 Annual Meeting, a mere 8 institutions accounted for a disproportionate number of both oral concurrent sessions and symposium speakers. This lack of institutional diversity, unless addressed, will hinder SER's ability to address other aspects of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

The Society for Epidemiologic Research and the Future of Diversity and Inclusion in Epidemiology.

"The mission of the Diversity and Inclusion Committee (D&I) in the Society for Epidemiologic Research is to foster the diversity of our membership and work towards the engagement of all members, from diverse backgrounds at all stages of their careers, in the Society's activities, with the intent of enhancing discovery in public health." As a foundational step in implementing our mission, the D&I Committee conducted a survey of SER membership. Here we report on the efforts we have undertaken to expand the diversity and inclusiveness of our Society and our aspirations for future efforts in support of D&I. Early on, we established the SERvisits program to conduct outreach to institutions and students that have historically been underrepresented at SER; we hope this program continues to grow in its reach and impact. We have also taken steps to increase the inclusiveness of SER activities, for example, by engaging members on issues of D&I through symposia and workshops at SER annual meetings and through social media. DeVilbiss et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2020;189(10):998-1010) have demonstrated that there is substantial room for improvement with regards to diversity and inclusion within SER. We invite SER members to become involved and collaborate on this long-term goal.

Diversity and Political Leaning: Considerations for Epidemiology.

The positive effects of increased diversity and inclusion in scientific research and practice are well documented. In this issue, DeVilbiss et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2020;189(10):998-1010) present findings from a survey used to collect information to characterize diversity among epidemiologists and perceptions of inclusion in the epidemiologic profession. They capture identity across a range of personal characteristics, including race, gender, socioeconomic background, sexual orientation, religion, and political leaning. In this commentary, we assert that the inclusion of political leaning as an axis of identity alongside the others undermines the larger project of promoting diversity and inclusion in the profession and is symptomatic of the movement for "ideological diversity" in higher education. We identify why political leaning is not an appropriate metric of diversity and detail why prioritizing ideological diversity counterintuitively can work against equity building initiatives. As an alternative to ideological diversity, we propose that epidemiologists take up an existing framework for research and practice that centers the voices and perspectives of historically marginalized populations in epidemiologic work.

Diversity and Inclusion in the Epidemiology Workforce.

Increasing participation by promoting diversity and inclusion in professional society membership has become an important topic for many scientific fields. In a recent issue of the Journal, DeVilbiss et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2020;189(10):998-1010) reported results from a survey conducted by the Society for Epidemiologic Research (SER) Diversity and Inclusion Committee by which several aspects of participation by sociodemographic and cultural variables among its members were measured. Here, we summarize the major findings of the survey, put the authors' results within the greater context of the epidemiology workforce, and provide suggestions on how the Committee could expand its influence by considering measuring variables related to career outcomes and trajectories. This suggestion is based on an attempt to link the interventions being facilitated by SER, the participation indices it is trying to improve, and the greater mission of SER to build sustainable career trajectories that produce the best science that will improve the health of human populations.

Recommendations to the Society for Epidemiologic Research for Further Promoting Diversity and Inclusion at the Annual Meeting and Beyond.

Increasing diverse engagement in the Society for Epidemiologic Research (SER) will positively impact the field of epidemiology. As the largest and longest-running epidemiologic society in North America, SER has long been a pioneer in promoting diversity and inclusion. A recent survey of SER members, however, showed there is still room for improving diversity, inclusion, representation, and participation in the Society. In this commentary, as members of both the SER and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Department of Epidemiology's Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Anti-Racism, and Science (Epi IDEAS) Working Group, we recommend 4 goals for the SER Annual Meeting and beyond: 1) convene epidemiologic researchers with diverse backgrounds and ideas; 2) promote an inclusive environment at the SER Annual Meeting; 3) develop, compile, and disseminate best practices to honor diversity in epidemiologic research; and 4) increase prioritization of health disparities research and methods. We also suggest strategies for achieving these goals so that SER can better include, support, and elevate members from historically disadvantaged groups. While our recommendations are tailored specifically to SER, the greater epidemiologic and academic communities could benefit from adopting these goals and strategies within their professional societies and conferences.

Beyond Diversity: Focusing on and Enhancing Inclusion in the Society for Epidemiologic Research.

Increasing diversity and inclusion among organizational membership has become a focus for many professional societies, including the Society for Epidemiologic Research (SER). In this issue of the Journal, DeVilbiss et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2020:189(10):998-1010) assessed dimensions of diversity and inclusion within SER to provide baseline data for future evaluations of Society initiatives. In our response, we note that diversity in SER appears strong but there is lag with regard to inclusion. We also highlight some of the major weaknesses of this study that hinder efforts to accurately evaluate inclusion within SER. There is a need to more concretely define inclusion and think broadly about how measures of inclusion should be operationalized in future surveys. Additional limitations of the study include its limited generalizability to the wider SER membership and the lack of questions about barriers to inclusion in SER activities. We conclude with recommendations for SER and other professional societies based on prior literature evaluating successful diversity and inclusion efforts. We also propose a conceptual model to assist with operationalizing and directing future analyses of inclusion measures. It is essential that SER move beyond efforts around diversity to focus on measuring and enhancing inclusion.

"Can we agree on that"? Plurality, power and language in participatory research.

Participatory epidemiology (PE) is a method that gathers data from groups through focus group interviews and participatory visual and scoring exercises. The method is often used in poor communities in low-income countries where it is hard to obtain conventional epidemiological data. This paper draws on research on the public sphere and democratic deliberation, along with research on language and interpretation, to suggest how PE research could be better equipped to account for diversity in local knowledge, include minority views and acknowledge power dynamics. These aspects are discussed under the three themes of 'plurality', 'power' and 'language'. A review of highly-cited PE literature suggests that PE research engages with plurality and power to a very limited extent, and only marginally more so with language and translation. Examples are taken from the authors' own PE research on African swine fever in -Uganda, classical swine fever in Germany, peste des petits ruminants (PPR) in Eastern Europe, and Ugandan pastoralists' understanding of cattle disease to provide more detail as to why conventional PE studies might fail to record issues of plurality, power and language, and also to suggest how this can be addressed. With reference to the literature on the public sphere and democratic deliberation, and on language and interpretation, this paper concludes with some suggestions as to how to take plurality, power and language into greater consideration in PE studies in future, thus improving the validity and reliability of PE data.