Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40346621›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025

Precision public health after Covid-19: a scoping review.

Martha Kenney, Laura Mamo

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

2 authors.

Martha KenneySan Francisco State University, San Francisco, USA. mkenney@sfsu.edu.
Laura MamoSan Francisco State University, San Francisco, USA.

Funding

U.S. National Science Foundation 2218494
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

"Precision public health" (PPH) emerged in 2015 as a charismatic vision to revolutionize traditional public health with data-driven solutions to the world's most challenging public health problems. A central goal of PPH is to use population-level data to improve health equity by targeting geographically localized at-risk populations. For this article, we conducted a scoping review to investigate whether and how PPH approaches were used for Covid-19 pandemic response and how they incorporated health equity goals in their approaches. We found that during the Covid-19 pandemic, discussions of PPH in the academic literature mostly focused on potential future implementation of PPH rather than on-the-ground Covid-19 pandemic response. In the few articles that described a research project and/or public health intervention at the intersection of PPH and Covid-19, researchers articulated PPH together with three sets of Covid-19 era public health practices: 1) vulnerability indexes; 2) near real-time surveillance; 3) pathogen sequencing. In each of these articulations, the most common method for achieving health equity was using epidemiological surveillance data to create risk stratification to direct resources to the most vulnerable. As these new articulations are tentative and have not yet become common in public health literature and policy, the article ends with a critical call to interrogate which versions of health equity are enacted and foreclosed in data-driven approaches to public health and how PPH can best serve vulnerable populations.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health EquityPrecision MedicinePublic HealthHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID40346621
PMCPMC12063331

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.