ArticleAIMS public health2026
Health workforce readiness for future pandemics: Evidence from undergraduate health sciences students in Georgia.
Article in AIMS 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Strengthening health workforce preparedness has become a critical public health priority in the post-COVID-19 era, particularly in countries facing workforce shortages and uneven integration of preparedness competencies. This study evaluated self-perceived pandemic preparedness among final-year biomedical and health sciences students in Georgia and examined the role of undergraduate education in preparing students for future public health emergencies. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among final-year students from medicine, dentistry, public health, nursing, and pharmacy programs (n = 296), with nursing (n = 6) and pharmacy (n = 1) students underrepresented. An adapted questionnaire assessed self-perceived preparedness, COVID-19 response participation, willingness to engage in future public health emergencies, and educational experiences. Preparedness dimensions were identified using exploratory factor analysis, and statistical analyses included descriptive, inferential, and regression methods. Results: Overall preparedness was moderate (M = 3.50, SD = 1.14). Two preparedness dimensions were identified: theoretical, preventive, communicative, and clinical knowledge and clinical and practical readiness. Practical skills, infection control participation, and emergency response activities showed the strongest associations with overall preparedness (p < 0.001). Despite moderate preparedness, 84.1% of students expressed willingness to contribute to future public health emergencies, rising to 97.5% among those with COVID-19 response experience. Students with COVID-19 response experience demonstrated higher preparedness across domains. Clinical and medical training were identified as the highest priority for curricular reform (43.6%), surpassing preventive, theoretical, and communication-focused measures. Conclusions: A gap exists between students' willingness to contribute during public health emergencies and their self-perceived preparedness. These findings suggest that undergraduate education may play an important role in strengthening preparedness for future public health emergencies. Greater emphasis on experiential learning, simulation-based training, and supervised participation in public health activities may help improve perceived preparedness. Georgia provides a relevant case study for countries facing similar workforce constraints and fragmented integration of preparedness competencies within undergraduate education.
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.