ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Cross-sectional study on the epidemiological investigation ability of professional staff from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Guizhou Province.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aims to evaluate the qualifications and identify skill enhancement areas for epidemiological investigators in Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCs) in Guizhou's, informing future training and policy initiatives to strengthen public health responses. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in August 2022, and an online, self-designed questionnaire on the Epidemiological Dynamic Data Collection platform was administered to evaluate the professional staff in CDCs. The responses were scored and presented using descriptive statistical methods, and the factors influencing the total score were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and linear regression. Results and discussion: A total of 1321 questionnaires were collected, yielding an average score of 14.86±3.49 and a qualification rate of 29.9%. The scoring rate of ability of individual protection and coordination in epidemic control was high (87.25%). Meanwhile, improvements in further training were needed in areas such as data analysis ability (23.67%), knowledge of site disinfection (40.40%), and epidemiological investigation skills (42.50%). No significant difference was observed between the scores of city and county CDCs, (
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.