A school of public health responds to the pandemic: A case study from Washington D.C.

The emergence of COVID-19 immediately affected higher education, and the closure of campuses at the start of the pandemic in March of 2020 forced educational institutions to quickly adapt to changing circumstances. Schools of public health faced challenges not only of shifting to remote learning and work environments, but also uniquely redirecting public health research and service efforts toward COVID-19. This paper offers a case study of how the Milken Institute School of Public Health at the George Washington University (GWSPH), the only school of public health in the nation's capital, initially adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a modified version of the Public Health Preparedness and Response Core Competency Model created by the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, we analyze how GWSPH worked in three areas-research, education, service/operations. We reviewed this initial response across four domains: model leadership; communication and management of information; planning and improving practice; and protecting worker (and student) health and safety. The adaptation of the model and the analysis of GWSPH's initial response to the pandemic can be useful to other schools of public health and health sciences in the United States and beyond, in preparing for all hazards. We hope that such analysis also informs the current concerns of schools such as return to in-person education as well as planning for future public health crises.

Peace and health: exploring the nexus in the Americas.

The relationship between peace and health is complex, multifactorial and fraught with challenges of definitions, measurements and outcomes. This exploratory commentary on this nexus within a focus on the Americas posits this challenge clearly and calls for more scholarship and empirical work on this issue from an interdisciplinary perspective. The overall goal of this paper is to try and explore the elements that impact the relationship between peace and health with a focus on the Americas (defined as countries spanning from Canada to Argentina) in the post-Cold war period. Focusing on the 1990s and onwards, we seek to underscore why violence continues to permeate these societies despite a third and lasting wave of democratisation in the hemisphere. We hope this will allow a more robust dialogue on peace and health in the regional and global health literature.

Saving lives through road safety risk factor interventions: global and national estimates.

Global road mortality is a leading cause of death in many low-income and middle-income countries. Data to support priority setting under current resource constraints are urgently needed to achieve Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3.6. This Series paper estimates the potential number of lives saved if each country implemented interventions to address risk factors for road injuries. We did a systematic review of all available evidence-based, preventive interventions for mortality reduction that targeted the four main risk factors for road injuries (ie, speeding, drink driving, helmet use, and use of seatbelt or child restraint). We used literature review variables and considered three key country-level variables (gross domestic product per capita, population density, and government effectiveness) to generate country-specific estimates on the potential annual attributable number of lives that would be saved by interventions focusing on these four risk factors in 185 countries. Our results suggest that the implementation of evidence-based road safety interventions that target the four main road safety risk factors could prevent between 25% and 40% of all fatal road injuries worldwide. Interventions addressing speed could save about 347 258 lives globally per year, and at least 16 304 lives would be saved through drink driving interventions. The implementation of seatbelt interventions could save about 121 083 lives, and 51 698 lives could be saved by helmet interventions. We identify country-specific estimates of the potential number of lives saved that would be attributable to these interventions. Our results show the potential effectiveness of the implementation and scaling of these interventions. This paper presents key evidence for priority setting on road safety interventions and shows a path for reaching SDG 3.6.

Is It Time to Restructure the National Institutes of Health or Research Mindsets?

[...]the NIH has major programs in (nonbiomedical) areas such as ethical, legal, and social implications of disease;implementation science;research communication and dissemination;and capacity development and research strengthening. [...]the apparent assumption that the NIH should be funding all types of research is confusing. [...]ifthere are in fact policy community frustrations, we would see declining funding to the NIH, but in fact funding has gone up, even in the most recent allocations.6 The discussion of trust in scientific knowledge, although based on a philosophical approach and theoretically tenable, ignores the current reality of how trust in science has broken down in practice in the contemporary era owing to what can be termed unfettered inclusion of raw opinions, ideology, and racism. The proposal for new institutes along two axes-determinants and processes-is a limited perspective from a multiepistemic view and suffers from some of the issues raised by the authors (e.g., misclassification of behavioral and social determinants, overlap and duplication between research focused on health systems, health services, populations, and communities). [...]it is unclear what a priori criteria (or principles) would be used to evaluate such a system, especially given that no existing research funding system (anywhere in the world) has been suggested as a model.

COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers in the United States: a social justice policy.

INTRODUCTION: Vaccination is the most effective strategy to mitigating COVID-19 and restoring societal function. As the pandemic evolves with no certainty of a herd immunity threshold, universal vaccination of at-risk populations is desirable. However, vaccine hesitancy threatens the return to normalcy, and healthcare workers (HCWs) must embrace their ambassadorial role of shoring up vaccine confidence. Unfortunately, voluntary vaccination has been suboptimal among HCWs in the United States, a priority group for whom immunization is essential for maintaining health system capacity and the safety of high-risk patients in their care. Consequently, some health systems have implemented mandates to improve compliance. AREAS COVERED: This article discusses the ethical and practical considerations of mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policies for HCWs utilizing some components of the World Health Organization's framework and the unique context of a pandemic with evolving infection dynamics. EXPERT OPINION: COVID-19 vaccine mandates for universal immunization of HCWs raise ethical and practical debates about their appropriateness, especially when the vaccines are pending full approval in most jurisdictions. Given the superiority of the vaccines to safety and testing protocols and their favorable safety profile, we encourage health systems to adopt vaccination mandates through participatory processes that address the concerns of stakeholders.

Social Determinants of Adherence to COVID-19 Risk Mitigation Measures Among Adults With Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health (SDOH) may limit the practice of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) risk mitigation guidelines with health implications for individuals with underlying cardiovascular disease (CVD). Population-based evidence of the association between SDOH and practicing such mitigation strategies in adults with CVD is lacking. We used the National Opinion Research Center's COVID-19 Household Impact Survey conducted between April and June 2020 to evaluate sociodemographic disparities in adherence to COVID-19 risk mitigation measures in a sample of respondents with underlying CVD representing 18 geographic areas of the United States. METHODS: CVD status was ascertained by self-reported history of receiving heart disease, heart attack, or stroke diagnosis. We built de novo, a cumulative index of SDOH burden using education, insurance, economic stability, 30-day food security, urbanicity, neighborhood quality, and integration. We described the practice of measures under the broad strategies of personal protection (mask, hand hygiene, and physical distancing), social distancing (avoiding crowds, restaurants, social activities, and high-risk contact), and work flexibility (work from home, canceling/postponing work). We reported prevalence ratios and 95% CIs for the association between SDOH burden (quartiles of cumulative indices) and practicing these measures adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, comorbidity, and interview wave. RESULTS: Two thousand thirty-six of 25 269 (7.0%) adults, representing 8.69 million in 18 geographic areas of the United States, reported underlying CVD. Compared with the least SDOH burden, fewer individuals with the greatest SDOH burden practiced all personal protection (75.6% versus 89.0%) and social distancing measures (41.9% versus 58.9%) and had any flexible work schedule (26.2% versus 41.4%). These associations remained statistically significant after full adjustment: personal protection (prevalence ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.73-0.96]; P=0.009), social distancing (prevalence ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.51-0.94]; P=0.018), and work flexibility (prevalence ratio, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.36-0.79]; P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: SDOH burden is associated with lower COVID-19 risk mitigation practices in the CVD population. Identifying and prioritizing individuals whose medical vulnerability is compounded by social adversity may optimize emerging preventive efforts, including vaccination guidelines.