ReviewJournal of public health management and practice : JPHMP
A decade of environmental public health tracking (2002-2012): progress and challenges.
Review in Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing Scenario-Based Strategies for Health, Climate, and Environmental Preparedness: The One Health, One Earth Approach.GeoHealth · 2026Article
- The U.S. national biomonitoring network - Enhancing capability and capacity to assess human chemical exposures.International journal of hygiene and environmental health · 2021Review
- Contribution of Satellite-Derived Aerosol Optical Depth PMAtmosphere · 2020Article
- Electronic health record case studies to advance environmental public health tracking.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2018Article
- Fulfilling the vision of environmental public health tracking.Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMPArticle
- Evaluating the Use of Electronic Health Records for Type 2 Diabetes Surveillance in 2 California Counties, 2010-2014.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe creation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Environmental Public Health Tracking Program spawned an invigorating and challenging approach toward implementing the nation's first population-based, environmental disease tracking surveillance system. More than 10 years have passed since its creation and an abundance of peer-reviewed articles have been published spanning a broad variety of public health topics related primarily to the goal of reducing diseases of environmental origin.
objectiveTo evaluate peer-reviewed literature related to Environmental Public Health Tracking during 2002-2012, recognize major milestones and challenges, and offer recommendations.
designA narrative overview was conducted using titles and abstracts of peer-reviewed articles, key word searches, and science-based search engine databases. MAIN OUTCOMES: Eighty published articles related to "health tracking" were identified and categorized according to 4 crossed-central themes. The Science and Research theme accounted for the majority of published articles, followed by Policy and Practice, Collaborations Among Health and Environmental Programs, and Network Development.
conclusionsOverall, progress was reported in the areas of data linkage, data sharing, surveillance methods, and network development. Ongoing challenges included formulating better ways to establish the connections between health and the environment, such as using biomonitoring, public water systems, and private well water data. Recommendations for future efforts include use of data to inform policy and practice and use of electronic health records data for environmental health surveillance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.