ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025
Precision public health after Covid-19: a scoping review.
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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bronchiectasis in the precision medicine era: pathogenesis and therapeutic advances.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Quantifying the attributable burden of economic inequality on under-five mortality across ten African countries: a WHO HEAT-based analysis.BMC public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
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
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.