ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Artificial intelligence-enabled early warning systems for public health preparedness: perspectives of senior public health leaders in a Small Island Developing State.
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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Artificial intelligence-enabled early warning systems (AI-EWS) are increasingly recognised as tools for strengthening public health preparedness and education in climate-vulnerable settings. However, limited empirical evidence exists on how public health leaders perceive their use in practice. This study aimed to examine the perspectives of senior public health leaders, specifically County Medical Officers of Health (CMOHs), on AI-EWS in Trinidad and Tobago. Materials and methods: An exploratory descriptive study was conducted using a structured survey of County Medical Officers of Health, with six of nine CMOHs completing the questionnaire (response rate = 66.7%). The survey assessed familiarity, perceived usefulness, system priorities, institutional readiness, and implementation barriers. Data were analysed descriptively using frequencies and proportions, with open-ended responses summarised using inductive thematic categorisation. Results: All respondents (6/6) identified infectious diseases and flooding as priority applications for AI-EWS, while three (3/6) identified heat-related risks. Key system features, including dashboards (5/6), integration with emergency services (5/6), and automated alerts (3/6), were widely perceived as useful. Equity was prioritised by all respondents (6/6), particularly for underserved populations. However, barriers were also reported, including budget constraints (5/6), limited technical capacity (3/6), and data challenges (3/6). Conclusion: AI-EWS are perceived as valuable tools for supporting public health decision-making, coordination, and professional learning in SIDS contexts. However, successful implementation will require strengthening infrastructure, workforce capacity, governance frameworks, and equitable system design. These findings provide early empirical insight to inform the responsible integration of AI-enabled systems into public health education and preparedness.
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.