Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42459488›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2026

Enhancing public health intelligence workforce capacity and capability: insights from English local authorities' COVID-19 response.

Janette Parr, Yen-Fu Chen, Amy Grove

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Janette ParrCentre for Evidence and Implementation Science, School of Social Policy and Society, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Yen-Fu ChenDepartment of Health and Welfare, College of City Management, University of Taipei, Taipei, Taiwan.
Amy GroveCentre for Evidence and Implementation Science, School of Social Policy and Society, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic provided a stimulus to improve emergency response capabilities in the United Kingdom. Compared to healthcare workers, there is a paucity of research examining the experiences of public health staff involved in the response. During the pandemic, English local authorities (LAs) responded to limit virus spread and mitigate its impacts by providing public health intelligence (PHI). This article reports workforce-related findings from a larger study which focused on understanding sub-national provision of PHI during an infectious disease emergency. Methods: A mixed method, sequential, exploratory study was conducted. This involved comparative case studies of LA responses and an anonymous online survey of LA PHI staff followed by data integration. The primary data collection method for the case studies was semi-structured interviews with PHI staff. A cross-case analysis of interview data using inductive thematic analysis was performed. Quantitative survey data was analyzed to produce descriptive statistics and long-form text responses supplemented the interview data. Qualitative and quantitative data were integrated by using case study findings to inform survey topics and by following an established framework to examine confirmation, complementarity, expansion, or discordance. Results: Data from 12 interviews and 120 survey responses was integrated. The pandemic saw changing demands for analytical capacity-the highest demand occurring at the outset. Inequities in allocation of keyworker status impacted those with childcare responsibilities. Staff identified knowledge gaps around health protection, data automation, information governance, and emerging data sources. PHI personnel had traumatic experience, and staff well-being was adversely affected by high workloads, limited leave, exposure to emotive data, and difficulties in disconnecting. Anticipating pandemics and emotional preparedness were valued mindsets. Peer support and effective leadership mitigated negative effects on wellbeing. Discussion: The traumatic effect of responding to the pandemic on some PHI staff might not be anticipated in a group not considered "frontline". We propose there is a duty to prepare staff for emergencies and implement best human resource practices. Findings suggest a need to improve public health workforce planning for emergencies. Emergency response plans should include the PHI function and be tied to public health authorities' capacity and capability to enact them.

Indexed as

COVID-19Public HealthEnglandHumansLocal GovernmentPandemicsPublic Health InfrastructureSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdomcase studiesdisease outbreakintegrationlocal governmentmixed methodspublic health informaticsSARS-CoV-2survey

Identifiers

PMID42459488
PMCPMC13369125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.