Healthy People establishes national goals and specific measurable objectives to improve the health and well-being of the nation. An overarching goal of Healthy People 2030 is to "eliminate health ...disparities, achieve health equity, and attain health literacy to improve the health and well-being of all." To inform Healthy People 2030 health equity and health disparities content and products, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP), in collaboration with NORC at the University of Chicago, conducted a review of peer-reviewed and gray literature to examine how health equity is defined, conceptualized, and measured by public health professionals.
We reviewed (1) peer-reviewed literature, (2) HHS and other public health organization Web sites, and (3) state and territorial health department plans. We also conducted targeted searches of the gray literature to identify tools and recommendations for measuring health equity.
While definitions of health equity identified in the scan varied, they often addressed similar concepts, including "highest level of health for all people," "opportunity for all," and "absence of disparities." Measuring health equity is challenging; however, strategies to measure and track progress toward health equity have emerged. There are a range of tools and resources that have the potential to help decision makers address health equity, such as health impact assessments, community health improvement plans, and adapting a Health in All Policies approach. Tools that visualize health equity data also support data-driven decision making.
Using similar language when discussing health equity will help align and advance efforts to improve health and well-being for all. Healthy People objectives, measures, and targets can help public health professionals advance health equity in their work. HHS ODPHP continues to develop Healthy People tools and resources to support public health professionals as they work with cross-sector partners to achieve health equity.
This study assesses how the nation's preeminent health promotion and disease prevention initiative, Healthy People, is utilized by key stakeholders.
A Web-based survey was administered to assess ...awareness and use of Healthy People among state, local, tribal health organizations and other key stakeholder groups. Follow-up interviews were conducted with a subset of respondents.
Awareness and use of Healthy People have remained high among state, local, and tribal stakeholders. Healthy People 2020 is most frequently used as a data source. The Leading Health Indicators (LHIs) are an important element of the initiative, and nearly 90% of organizations that use the LHIs found them valuable. Awareness and use of other tools and resources are more limited.
Healthy People continues to be a valued resource among public health stakeholders; however, continued outreach is needed to promote the use of tools and resources available on healthypeople.gov for this decade and beyond. Healthy People is a national initiative used most frequently as a data source by state and local health departments, tribal organizations, and other public health practitioners.
Background
The number of disaster-related deaths recorded by vital statistics departments often differs from that reported by other agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric ...Administration-National Weather Service storm database and the American Red Cross. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has launched an effort to improve disaster-related death scene investigation reporting practices to make data more comparable across jurisdictions, improve accuracy of reporting disaster-related deaths, and enhance identification of risk and protective factors. We conducted a literature review to examine how death scene data are collected and how such data are used to determine disaster relatedness.
Methods
Two analysts conducted a parallel search using Google and Google Scholar. We reviewed published peer-reviewed articles and unpublished documents including relevant forms, protocols, and worksheets from coroners, medical examiners, and death scene investigators.
Results
We identified 177 documents: 32 published peer-reviewed articles and 145 other documents (grey literature). Published articles suggested no consistent approach for attributing deaths to a disaster. Researchers generally depended on death certificates to identify disaster-related deaths; several studies also drew on supplemental sources, including medical examiner, coroner, and active surveillance reports.
Conclusions
These results highlight the critical importance of consistent, accurate data collection during a death investigation. Review of the grey literature found variation in use of death scene data collection tools, indicating the potential for widespread inconsistency in data captured for routine reporting and public health surveillance. Findings from this review will be used to develop guidelines and tools for capturing disaster-related death investigation data.
PDF
