ArticleJournal of public health management and practice : JPHMP
Strategic and Performance Planning in US Local Health Departments: A Comparative Analysis of Strategic, Community Health Improvement, and Quality Improvement Plans.
Article 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The role of the Chief Health Strategist in community health improvement: a MAPP 2.0 counterproposal.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextLocal health departments (LHDs) are a critical component of the US public health infrastructure. To guide their work and evaluate progress, LHDs develop and maintain a range of planning documents, including strategic plans (SPs), community health improvement plans (CHIPs), and quality improvement plans (QIPs).
objectiveThe goal of this study was to provide information on current LHD practices related to strategic planning and performance improvement.
designThe study used an environmental scan and document analysis of a sample of 93 plans from 31 LHDs to explore commonalities and differences within the strategies, goals, and priorities of SPs, CHIPs, and QIPs. Framework analysis was used, involving initial document review, development of a coding framework, and applying this framework to all documents iteratively. To ensure reliability, 19% of documents were double-coded, with discrepancies resolved through team discussions.
resultsOf the 31 LHDs included in this analysis, most were urban (89.7%) and medium-sized (64.5%), with a large percentage from the Midwest (41.9%). The analysis revealed that most LHDs used established frameworks to develop plans and identify priority areas. Frequently listed priority areas included behavioral health, social determinants of health, access to care, chronic disease, and nutrition and physical activity. Frequently listed strategies to improve priority areas included building collaborations and partnerships, advocating for policy change, increasing access to services and resources, and increasing awareness of issues. While CHIPs frequently incorporated social determinants of health as part of a guiding framework, QIPs focused on fostering continuous quality improvement. Differences were documented based on jurisdiction size, degree of rurality, and region.
conclusionsThe study identified a widespread commitment to develop plans using established frameworks, community engagement, and data-driven decision-making, while also highlighting the diverse needs and capacities of LHDs in addressing public health challenges.
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.