Defining Core Competencies for Epidemiologists in Academic Settings to Tackle Tomorrow's Health Research Challenges: A Structured, Multinational Effort.

Only a few efforts have been made to define core competencies for epidemiologists working in academic settings. Here we describe a multinational effort to define competencies for epidemiologists, who are increasingly facing emerging and potentially disruptive technological and societal health trends in academic research. During a 1.5-year period (2017-2019), we followed an iterative process that aimed to be inclusive and multinational to reflect the various perspectives of a diverse group of epidemiologists. Competencies were developed by a consortium in a consensus-oriented process that spanned 3 main activities: 2 in-person interactive meetings held in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and Zurich, Switzerland, and an online survey. In total, 93 meeting participants from 16 countries and 173 respondents from 19 countries contributed to the development of 31 competencies. These 31 competencies included 14 on "developing a scientific question" and "study planning," 12 on "study conduct and analysis," 3 on "overarching competencies," and 2 on "communication and translation." The process described here provides a consensus-based framework for defining and adapting the field. It should initiate a continuous process of thinking about competencies and the implications for teaching epidemiology to ensure that epidemiologists working in academic settings are well prepared for today's and tomorrow's health research.

On Being an Epidemiologist.

This commentary addresses being an epidemiologist at a time when the field of epidemiology again faces a paradigm shift as the tools for research on human health draw increasingly on emerging technologies-various omics and new methods for collecting individual data at high intensity-and on new methods for carrying out research through administrative and health care data bases linked to biobanks. At the same time, epidemiologists in public health practice continue to face the usual array of challenges, but with the threat of global issues as well. The profession of epidemiologist is not monolithic; it embraces a broad range of activities and professional venues, reflecting the many contexts where epidemiologists do their work, the nature of the problems addressed, and the span and application of their findings. Obtaining data from people and populations comes with serious ethical obligations related to privacy and confidentiality of individuals and respect for the populations studied. Beyond generating and analyzing data, epidemiologists engage in guiding action through the evidence they have created with the ultimate goal of advancing health. This commentary addresses "mega-trends" that will affect the profession in the decades to come.

CDC's "Flexible" Epidemiologist: A Strategy for Enhancing Health Department Infectious Disease Epidemiology Capacity.

CONTEXT: CDC's Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity for Infectious Diseases (ELC) Cooperative Agreement aims to help health departments strengthen core epidemiology capacity needed to respond to a variety of emerging infectious diseases. In fiscal year 2014, $6 million was awarded to 41 health departments for flexible epidemiologists (FEs). FEs were intended to help meet health departments' unique needs and support unanticipated events that could require the diversion of resources to specific emerging or reemerging diseases. OBJECTIVE: Explore multiple perspectives to characterize how FEs are utilized and to understand the perceived value of this strategy from the health department perspective. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted 14 in-depth interviews using a semistructured questionnaire with a heterogeneous sample of 8 state health departments; 2 different instruments were administered to ELC principal investigators (PIs) or supervisors, and FEs. The team produced a codebook consisting of both structural and data-driven codes to prepare for a thematic analysis of the data. RESULTS: Three major patterns emerged to describe how FEs are being used in health departments; most commonly, FEs were used to support priorities and gaps across a range of infectious diseases, with an emphasis on enteric diseases. Almost all of the health departments utilized FEs to assist in investigating and responding to outbreaks, maintaining and upgrading surveillance systems, and coordinating and collaborating with partners. Both PIs and supervisors highly valued the flexibility it offered to their programs because FEs were cross-trained and could be used to help with situations where additional staff members were needed. CONCLUSION: ELC enhances epidemiology capacity in health departments by providing flexible personnel that help sustain areas with losses in capacity, addressing programmatic gaps, and supporting unanticipated events. Our findings support the notion that flexible personnel could be an effective model for strengthening epidemiology capacity among health departments. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY & PRACTICE: Our findings have practical implications for addressing the overall decline in the public health workforce, as well as the current context and environment of public health funding at both state and federal levels.

Barriers and Facilitators to Scientific Writing Among Applied Epidemiologists.

CONTEXT: Communication in the form of written and oral reports and presentations is a core competency for epidemiologists at governmental public health agencies. Many applied epidemiologists do not publish peer-reviewed articles, limiting the scientific literature of best practices in evidence-based public health. OBJECTIVES: To describe the writing and publishing experiences of applied epidemiologists and identify barriers and facilitators to publishing. DESIGN: Telephone focus groups and an 18-question multiple-choice and short-answer Web-based assessment were fielded in 2014. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Six focus groups composed of 26 applied epidemiologists and an online assessment answered by 396 applied epidemiologists. Sample selection was stratified by years of experience. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Past publishing experience, current job duties as related to publishing, barriers and facilitators to writing and publishing, and desired training in writing and publishing were assessed through focus groups and the online assessment. RESULTS: Focus groups identified 4 themes: job expectations, barriers to publishing, organizational culture, and the understanding of public health practice among reviewers as issues related to writing and publishing. Most respondents (80%) expressed a desire to publish; however, only 59% had published in a peer-reviewed journal. An academic appointment (among doctoral educated respondents) was identified as a facilitator to publishing as was access to peer-reviewed literature. Time (68%) was identified as the greatest barrier to writing and publishing. Other major barriers included lack of encouragement or support (33%) within the public health agency and agency clearance processes (32%). Assistance with journal selection (62%), technical writing skills (60%), and manuscript formatting (57%) were listed as the most needed trainings. CONCLUSION: Public health agencies can be facilitators for epidemiologists to contribute to the scientific literature through increasing access to the peer-reviewed literature, creating a supportive environment for writing and publishing, and investing in desired and needed training. The results have implications for modifying workplace policies surrounding writing and publishing.

The Occupational Depression Inventory: A new tool for clinicians and epidemiologists.

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms induced by insurmountable job stress and sick leave for mental health reasons have become a focal concern among occupational health specialists. The present study introduces the Occupational Depression Inventory (ODI), a measure designed to quantify the severity of work-attributed depressive symptoms and establish provisional diagnoses of job-ascribed depression. The ODI comprises nine symptom items and a subsidiary question assessing turnover intention. METHODS: A total of 2254 employed individuals were recruited in the U.S., New Zealand, and France. We examined the psychometric and structural properties of the ODI as well as the nomological network of work-attributed depressive symptoms. We adopted an approach centered on exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) bifactor analysis. We developed a diagnostic algorithm for identifying likely cases of job-ascribed depression (SPSS syntax provided). RESULTS: The ODI showed strong reliability and high factorial validity. ESEM bifactor analysis indicated that, as intended, the ODI can be used as a unidimensional measure (Explained Common Variance = 0.891). Work-attributed depressive symptoms correlated in the expected direction with our other variables of interest-e.g., job satisfaction, general health status-and were markedly associated with turnover intention. Of our 2254 participants, 7.6% (n = 172) met the criteria for a provisional diagnosis of job-ascribed depression. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the ODI constitutes a sound measure of work-attributed depressive symptoms. The ODI may help occupational health researchers and practitioners identify, track, and treat job-ascribed depression more effectively. ODI-based research may contribute to informing occupational health policies and regulations in the future.