Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35060805›Full record

ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)

Prevention Research Centers and COVID-19: Models of a Community-Engaged Response to a Public Health Emergency.

Kyle R Busse, Stephenie C Lemon, Beth P Comerford, Nadia S Islam, Brigette F Ulin, Michael P Eriksen, Alice S Ammerman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kyle R BusseCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1892-4194
Stephenie C LemonUniversity of Massachusetts Worcester Prevention Research Center, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Beth P ComerfordYale-Griffin Prevention Research Center, Derby, CT, USA.
Nadia S IslamNew York University-City University of New York Prevention Research Center, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Brigette F UlinDivision of Population Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Michael P EriksenGeorgia State University School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Alice S AmmermanCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

Global Cardiometabolic Disease TrainingT32HL129969 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ADAIR, LINDA S · 2016 to 2025
$2.1M
NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL129969
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For more than 30 years, the network of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-funded Prevention Research Centers (PRCs) has worked with local communities and partners to implement and evaluate public health interventions and policies for the prevention of disease and promotion of health. The COVID-19 pandemic tested the PRC network's ability to rapidly respond to multiple, simultaneous public health crises. On April 28, 2020, to assess the network's engagement with activities undertaken in response to the early phase of the pandemic, PRC network leadership distributed an online survey to the directors of 34 currently or formerly funded PRCs, asking them to report their PRCs' engagement with predetermined activities across 9 topical areas and provide case studies exemplifying that engagement. We received responses from 24 PRCs, all of which reported engagement with at least 1 of the 9 topical areas (mean, 5). The topical areas with which the greatest number of PRCs reported engagement were support of frontline agencies (21 of 24, 88%) and support of activities related to health care (21 of 24, 88%). The mean number of activities with which PRCs reported engagement was 11. The PRCs provided more than 90 case studies exemplifying their work. The results of the survey indicated that the PRCs mobilized their personnel and resources to support the COVID-19 response in less than 6 weeks. We posit that the speed of this response was due, in part, to the broad and diverse expertise of PRC personnel and long-standing partnerships between PRCs and the communities in which they work.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationPublic HealthCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.COVID-19Health Services ResearchHumansIntersectoral CollaborationOrganizational Case StudiesPreventive Health ServicesSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesCOVID-19disease preventionemergency responsehealth promotionPrevention Research Centers

Identifiers

PMID35060805
PMCPMC8900237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.