Last data update: Sep 16, 2024. (Total: 47680 publications since 2009)
Records 1-2 (of 2 Records) |
Query Trace: Minnick A [original query] |
---|
A Delphi study to assess the effect of changes in language between the first and second editions of the WHO's Joint External Evaluation
Gigger DR , Mosoff JM , Pinto M , Mapatano D , Mahar M , Minnick A . BMJ Glob Health 2024 9 (5) INTRODUCTION: Countries use the WHO Joint External Evaluation (JEE) tool-part of the WHO International Health Regulations (2005) Monitoring and Evaluation Framework-for voluntary evaluation of global health security (GHS) capacities. After releasing the JEE first edition (E1) in 2016, WHO released the JEE second edition (E2) in 2018 with language changes to multiple indicators and associated capacity levels. To understand the effect of language changes on countries' ability to meet requirements in each edition, we conducted a Delphi study-a method where a panel of experts reach consensus on a topic through iterative, anonymous surveys-to solicit feedback from 40+ GHS experts with expertise in one or more of the 19 JEE technical areas. METHODS: We asked experts first to compare the language changes for each capacity level within each indicator and identify how these changes affected the indicator overall; then to assess the ability of a country to achieve the same capacity level using E2 as compared with E1 using a Likert-style score (1-5), where '1' was 'significantly easier' and '5' was 'significantly harder'; and last to provide a qualitative justification for score selections. We analysed the medians and IQR of responses to determine where experts reached consensus. RESULTS: Results demonstrate that 14 indicators and 49 capacity levels would be harder to achieve in E2. CONCLUSION: Findings underscore the importance of considering how language alterations impact how the JEE measures GHS capacity and the feasibility of using the JEE to monitor changes in capacity over time. |
Physical, mental, and financial impacts from drought in two California counties, 2015
Barreau T , Conway D , Haught K , Jackson R , Kreutzer R , Lockman A , Minnick S , Roisman R , Rozell D , Smorodinsky S , Tafoya D , Wilken JA . Am J Public Health 2017 107 (5) e1-e8 OBJECTIVES: To evaluate health impacts of drought during the most severe drought in California's recorded history with a rapid assessment method. METHODS: We conducted Community Assessments for Public Health Emergency Response during October through November 2015 in Tulare County and Mariposa County to evaluate household water access, acute stressors, exacerbations of chronic diseases and behavioral health issues, and financial impacts. We evaluated pairwise associations by logistic regression with pooled data. RESULTS: By assessment area, households reported not having running water (3%-12%); impacts on finances (25%-39%), property (39%-54%), health (10%-20%), and peace of mind (33%-61%); worsening of a chronic disease (16%-46%); acute stress (8%-26%); and considering moving (14%-34%). Impacts on finances or property were each associated with impacts on health and peace of mind, and acute stress. CONCLUSIONS: Drought-impacted households might perceive physical and mental health effects and might experience financial or property impacts related to the drought. Public Health Implications. Local jurisdictions should consider implementing drought assistance programs, including behavioral health, and consider rapid assessments to inform public health action. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print March 21, 2017: e1-e8. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2017.303695). |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:Sep 16, 2024
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure