Public health emergency preparedness (PHEP) all too often focusses only on institutional capabilities, including their technical expertise and political influence, while overlooking community capabilities. However, the success of institutional emergency preparedness plans depends upon communities and institutions working together to ensure successful anticipation, response and recovery. Broader community engagement is therefore recommended worldwide. This literature review was carried out to identify enablers and barriers to community and institutional synergies in emergency preparedness. Searches were undertaken across bibliographic databases and grey literature sources. The literature identified was qualitative in nature. A qualitative, ‘best fit’ framework approach using a pre-existing framework was used to analyse the literature, whereby themes were added and changed as analysis progressed. A working definition of community was identified, based on a ‘whole community’ approach, inclusive of the whole multitude of stakeholders including community residents and emergency management staff. Given the diversity in community make-up, the types of emergencies that could be faced, the socio-economic, environmental and political range of communities, there are no set practices that will be effective for all communities. The most effective way of engaging communities in emergency preparedness is context-dependent and the review did draw out some important key messages for institutions to consider.
The threat of serious, cross-border communicable disease outbreaks in Europe poses a significant challenge to public health and emergency preparedness because the relative likelihood of these threats and the pathogens involved are constantly shifting in response to a range of changing disease drivers. To inform strategic planning by enabling effective resource allocation to manage the consequences of communicable disease outbreaks, it is useful to be able to rank and prioritise pathogens. This paper reports on a literature review which identifies and evaluates the range of methods used for risk ranking. Searches were performed across biomedical and grey literature databases, supplemented by reference harvesting and citation tracking. Studies were selected using transparent inclusion criteria and underwent quality appraisal using a bespoke checklist based on the AGREE II criteria. Seventeen studies were included in the review, covering five methodologies. A narrative analysis of the selected studies suggests that no single methodology was superior. However, many of the methods shared common components, around which a 'best-practice' framework was formulated. This approach is intended to help inform decision makers' choice of an appropriate risk-ranking study design.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.