scholarly journals Expert Advisory Groups: Exploring the Sensemaking Proces s During a Public Health C risis R esponse

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iva Seto ◽  
David Johnstone ◽  
Jennifer Campbell-Meier
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Process Information ◽  
Unexpected Event ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Creation Process ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Advisory Groups ◽  
Expert Advisory ◽  
Meaning Creation

In a public health crisis, experts (such as epidemiologists, public health officers, physicians and virologists) support key decision  makers with advice in a highly dynamic, pressured,  and time-sensitive context. Experts must process information (to provide advice) as quickly as possible, yet this must be balanced with ensuring the information is credible, reliable,  and relevant. When an unexpected event occurs, it may lead to a gap between what is  experienced and what was expected; sensemaking is a meaning creation process which is engaged to fill the gap. This research explores how experts engage in sensemaking during a  public health crisis.

scholarly journals Expert Advisory Groups: Exploring the Sensemaking Process During a Public Health Crisis Response

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Iva Seto
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Crisis Response ◽  
Infection Prevention And Control ◽  
Advisory Group ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Long Duration ◽  
Expert Advisory ◽  
Expert Advisory Group

<p>Crisis sensemaking research has focused mainly on acute crises such as wildfires or industrial accidents, with crisis response being approximately under 72 hours. However, there is limited research on long duration crisis sensemaking for crisis response that may be several weeks, months, or even years. This research study aims to explore long duration crisis sensemaking during a public health crisis.  During the crisis response period, key decision makers (KDMs) face a plethora of challenges, including being inundated with information, with varying levels of quality and relevance, or not having the right kind of information. They may rely on an Expert Advisory Group (EAG) to advise on the scientific/medical aspect of the disease. The EAG is comprised of specialists such as infectious disease physicians, infection prevention and control practitioners, epidemiologists, and public health physicians.  The 2003 SARS outbreak in Toronto, Canada, was the context for this research. Participants were recruited who served as members of the Ontario SARS Scientific Advisory Committee (OSSAC) or were stakeholders during the crisis. Among their duties, these experts were tasked to write directives (mandated protocols) that govern all aspects of hospital life, from patient transfers, to cleaning. Data was collected in multiple forms, including: public inquiry reports, meeting minutes, newspaper articles, and interviews. Following a constructivist grounded theory strategy, I conducted several iterations of data collection and analysis.  The findings include a conceptual framework of EAG social sensemaking through a long duration crisis, depicting the sequential process of a stream of sensemaking (the creation and revision of one directive). A second conceptual framework on the information dynamics of long duration social sensemaking reflects the learning over the course of the crisis period. Finally, a third conceptual framework on the regulation of expert advisory group sensemaking as a balance between the knowns and unknowns in the greater health system is presented.</p>

Delhi’s public health crisis and the neglect of urbanisation

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Turok
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Capital City ◽  
Compelling Evidence ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Civil Society Organisations

India’s capital city Delhi is facing an unprecedented public health crisis that is not receiving sufficient government attention. Rapid urbanisation is part of the challenge. For too long public authorities have neglected the needs of its expanding poor communities for decent and dignified living conditions. Meanwhile, affluent groups benefit from various government privileges that seem difficult to justify. One way of disrupting the inertia is for civil society organisations to engage communities in building a compelling evidence base to hold decision-makers to account and demand social change.

scholarly journals Methods to support evidence-informed decision-making in the midst of COVID-19: creation and evolution of a rapid review service from the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Neil-Sztramko ◽  
Emily Belita ◽  
Robyn L. Traynor ◽  
Emily Clark ◽  
Leah Hagerman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Health Decision

Abstract Background The COVID-19 public health crisis has produced an immense and quickly evolving body of evidence. This research speed and volume, along with variability in quality, could overwhelm public health decision-makers striving to make timely decisions based on the best available evidence. In response to this challenge, the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools developed a Rapid Evidence Service, building on internationally accepted rapid review methodologies, to address priority COVID-19 public health questions. Results Each week, the Rapid Evidence Service team receives requests from public health decision-makers, prioritizes questions received, and frames the prioritized topics into searchable questions. We develop and conduct a comprehensive search strategy and critically appraise all relevant evidence using validated tools. We synthesize the findings into a final report that includes key messages, with a rating of the certainty of the evidence using GRADE, as well as an overview of evidence and remaining knowledge gaps. Rapid reviews are typically completed and disseminated within two weeks. From May 2020 to July 21, 2021, we have answered more than 31 distinct questions and completed 32 updates as new evidence emerged. Reviews receive an average of 213 downloads per week, with some reaching over 7700. To date reviews have been accessed and cited around the world, and a more fulsome evaluation of impact on decision-making is planned. Conclusions The development, evolution, and lessons learned from our process, presented here, provides a real-world example of how review-level evidence can be made available – rapidly and rigorously, and in response to decision-makers’ needs – during an unprecedented public health crisis.

scholarly journals Methods to support evidence-informed decision-making in the midst of COVID-19: Creation and evolution of a rapid review service from the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Neil-Sztramko ◽  
Emily Belita ◽  
Robyn L. Traynor ◽  
Emily Clark ◽  
Leah Hagerman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Relevant Evidence ◽  
Health Decision ◽  
Comprehensive Search

Abstract The COVID-19 public health crisis has produced an immense and quickly evolving body of evidence. This research speed and volume, along with variability in quality, could overwhelm public health decision-makers striving to make timely decisions based on the best available evidence. In response to this challenge, the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools developed a Rapid Evidence Service, building on internationally accepted rapid review methodologies, to address priority COVID-19 public health questions. Each week, we receive requests from public health decision-makers and frame the prioritized topics into searchable questions. We develop and conduct a comprehensive search strategy and critically appraise all relevant evidence using validated tools. We synthesize the findings into a final report that includes key messages, with a rating of the certainty of the evidence using GRADE, as well as an overview of evidence and remaining knowledge gaps. Rapid reviews are typically completed and disseminated within one to two weeks. As of February 25, 2021, we have answered more than 27 distinct questions and completed 21 updates as new evidence emerged. The overview of our process, presented here, provides a real-world example of how review-level evidence can be made available – rapidly and rigorously, and in response to decision-makers’ needs – during an unprecedented public health crisis.

scholarly journals Expert Advisory Groups: Exploring the Sensemaking Process During a Public Health Crisis Response

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Iva Seto
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Crisis Response ◽  
Infection Prevention And Control ◽  
Advisory Group ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Long Duration ◽  
Expert Advisory ◽  
Expert Advisory Group

<p>Crisis sensemaking research has focused mainly on acute crises such as wildfires or industrial accidents, with crisis response being approximately under 72 hours. However, there is limited research on long duration crisis sensemaking for crisis response that may be several weeks, months, or even years. This research study aims to explore long duration crisis sensemaking during a public health crisis.  During the crisis response period, key decision makers (KDMs) face a plethora of challenges, including being inundated with information, with varying levels of quality and relevance, or not having the right kind of information. They may rely on an Expert Advisory Group (EAG) to advise on the scientific/medical aspect of the disease. The EAG is comprised of specialists such as infectious disease physicians, infection prevention and control practitioners, epidemiologists, and public health physicians.  The 2003 SARS outbreak in Toronto, Canada, was the context for this research. Participants were recruited who served as members of the Ontario SARS Scientific Advisory Committee (OSSAC) or were stakeholders during the crisis. Among their duties, these experts were tasked to write directives (mandated protocols) that govern all aspects of hospital life, from patient transfers, to cleaning. Data was collected in multiple forms, including: public inquiry reports, meeting minutes, newspaper articles, and interviews. Following a constructivist grounded theory strategy, I conducted several iterations of data collection and analysis.  The findings include a conceptual framework of EAG social sensemaking through a long duration crisis, depicting the sequential process of a stream of sensemaking (the creation and revision of one directive). A second conceptual framework on the information dynamics of long duration social sensemaking reflects the learning over the course of the crisis period. Finally, a third conceptual framework on the regulation of expert advisory group sensemaking as a balance between the knowns and unknowns in the greater health system is presented.</p>

scholarly journals Methods to support evidence-informed decision-making in the midst of COVID- 19: Creation and evolution of a rapid review service from the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Neil-Sztramko ◽  
Emily Belita ◽  
Robyn L. Traynor ◽  
Emily Clark ◽  
Leah Hagerman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Health Decision

Abstract Background The COVID-19 public health crisis has produced an immense and quickly evolving body of evidence. This research speed and volume, along with variability in quality, could overwhelm public health decision-makers striving to make timely decisions based on the best available evidence. In response to this challenge, the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools developed a Rapid Evidence Service, building on internationally accepted rapid review methodologies, to address priority COVID-19 public health questions. Methods Each week, we receive requests from public health decision-makers and frame the prioritized topics into searchable questions. We develop and conduct a comprehensive search strategy and critically appraise all relevant evidence using validated tools. We synthesize the findings into a final report that includes key messages, with a rating of the certainty of the evidence using GRADE, as well as an overview of evidence and remaining knowledge gaps. Rapid reviews are typically completed and disseminated within two weeks. Results As of May 12, 2021, we have answered more than 29 distinct questions and completed 28 updates as new evidence emerged. Reviews receive an average of 200 downloads per week, with some reaching up to 5000. To date reviews have been accessed and cited around the world, and a more fulsome evaluation of impact on decision making is planned. Conclusions The development, evolution, and lessons learned from our process, presented here, provides a real-world example of how review-level evidence can be made available – rapidly and rigorously, and in response to decision-makers’ needs – during an unprecedented public health crisis.

Molecular characterization of SARS-CoV-2

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miribane Dërmaku-Sopjani ◽  
Mentor Sopjani
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Drug Targets ◽  
Virus Genome ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Therapeutic Drugs ◽  
New Public Health ◽  
New Public ◽  
And Function

Abstract:: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently a new public health crisis threatening the world. This pandemic disease is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The virus has been reported to be originated in bats and by yet unknown intermediary animals were transmitted to humans in China 2019. The SARSCoV- 2 spreads faster than its two ancestors the SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERSCoV) but has reduced fatality. At present, the SARS-CoV-2 has caused about a 1.16 million of deaths with more than 43.4 million confirmed cases worldwide, resulting in a serious threat to public health globally with yet uncertain impact. The disease is transmitted by inhalation or direct contact with an infected person. The incubation period ranges from 1 to 14 days. COVID-19 is accompanied by various symptoms, including cough, fatigue. In most people the disease is mild, but in some other people, such as in elderly and people with chronic diseases, it may progress from pneumonia to a multi-organ dysfunction. Many people are reported asymptomatic. The virus genome is sequenced, but new variants are reported. Numerous biochemical aspects of its structure and function are revealed. To date, no clinically approved vaccines and/or specific therapeutic drugs are available to prevent or treat the COVID-19. However, there are reported intensive researches on the SARSCoV- 2 to potentially identify vaccines and/or drug targets, which may help to overcome the disease. In this review, we discuss recent advances in understanding the molecular structure of SARS-CoV-2 and its biochemical characteristics.

Anticipating on a post covid-19 world and the pivotal role of science and technology

Coronaviruses ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saeed Khan ◽  
Tusha Sharma ◽  
Basu Dev Banerjee ◽  
Scotty Branch ◽  
Shea Harrelson
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Pivotal Role ◽  
Public Healthcare ◽  
Healthcare Organizations ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Outbreak Management ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Future Outbreak

: 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.

Communications and Politics

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua M. Sharfstein
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Accurate Information ◽  
Political Judgment ◽  
Political Leaders ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Control And Prevention ◽  
Public Health Officials ◽  
Centers For Disease Control

An effective communications approach starts with a basic dictum set forth by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: “Be first, be right, be credible.” Agencies must establish themselves as vital sources of accurate information to maintain the public’s trust. At the same time, public health officials must recognize that communications play out in the context of ideological debates, electoral rivalries, and other political considerations. During a public health crisis, this means that health officials often need to constructively engage political leaders in communications and management. Navigating these waters in the middle of a crisis can be treacherous. Figuring out the best way to engage elected leaders is a core aspect of political judgment.

The Public Health Crisis Survival Guide

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua M. Sharfstein
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Police Officers ◽  
Health Agency ◽  
Health Improvement ◽  
Strong Response ◽  
Popular Imagination ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
Critical Skills

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document