Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 28, Supplement—December 2022
SUPPLEMENT ISSUE
Workforce

Continuing Contributions of Field Epidemiology Training Programs to Global COVID-19 Response

Elizabeth BellComments to Author , Camille Mittendorf, Erika Meyer, Olivia Barnum, Carl Reddy, Seymour Williams, Henry Baggett, and Reina Turcios-Ruiz
Author affiliations: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA (E. Bell, C. Mittendorf, E. Meyer, O. Barnum, S. Williams, H. Baggett, R. Turcios-Ruiz); Task Force for Global Health, Decatur, Georgia, USA (C. Reddy); Training Programs in Epidemiology and Public Health Interventions Network (TEPHINET), Decatur (C. Reddy)

Main Article

Table 2

Selected characteristics of the Field Epidemiology Training Programs that responded to surveys about COVID-19 response, 2020–2021*

WHO regional office This study
 Survey 1†
No. reporting country programs
(no. invited) Median age of 
program, y 
(range) Median days since first reported COVID-19 case in country (range)‡ No. reporting country programs
(no. invited) Median age of 
program, y 
(range) Median days since first reported COVID-19 case in country (range)‡
Africa 11 (30) 11 (3–28) 405 (322–491) 24 (27) 8 (2–27) 19 (3–35)
Eastern Mediterranean 7 (12) 15 (0–32) 414 (376–508) 9 (11) 10 (1–31) 33 (14–51)
Europe 4 (9) 9 (3–10) 446 (411–498) 6 (9) 11 (2–25) 47 (23–52)
Americas 5 (21) 20 (10–20) 340 (330–399) 15 (22) 19 (3–69) 27 (11–74)
Southeast Asia 1 (6) 20 (20–20) 448 (448–448) 5 (7) 19 (2–40) 34 (16–74)
Western Pacific
 4 (14)
 11 (10–20)
 425 (407–565)
6 (12)
 18 (9–36)
 73 (56–105)
All programs 32 (92) 11 (0–32) 412 (322–565) 65 (88) 11 (1- 69) 25 (3–105)

*One regional program in Europe and 1 in the Americas were excluded from calculation of days to survey response since first COVID-19 case was reported. Refer to [[ANCHOR###T1###Table 1###Anchor]] for numbers in each region by survey. †Survey 1, Hu et al. (10). ‡Regional programs serving multiple countries and four programs (Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, and Yemen) that responded to the survey before the first COVID-19 case was reported in their country were not included in the calculation of days to survey response since first COVID-19 case was reported

Main Article

References
  1. Traicoff  DA, Walke  HT, Jones  DS, Gogstad  EK, Imtiaz  R, White  ME. Replicating success: developing a standard FETP curriculum. Public Health Rep. 2008;123 Suppl 1:28–34.
  2. Al Nsour  M, Khader  Y, Bashier  H, Alsoukhni  M. Evaluation of advanced Field Epidemiology Training Programs in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: a multi-country study. Front Public Health. 2021;9:684174. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Jones  D, MacDonald  G, Volkov  B, Herrera-Guibert  D. Multisite evaluation of Field Epidemiology Training Programs: findings and recommendations. 2014 [cited 2017 Jul 21]. https://www.cdc.gov/globalhealth/healthprotection/fetp/pdf/fetp_evaluation_report_may_2014.pdf
  4. Traicoff  DA, Suarez-Rangel  G, Espinosa-Wilkins  Y, Lopez  A, Diaz  A, Caceres  V. Strong and flexible: developing a three-tiered curriculum for the Regional Central America Field Epidemiology Training Program. Pedagogy Health Promot. 2015;1:74–82. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. André  AM, Lopez  A, Perkins  S, Lambert  S, Chace  L, Noudeke  N, et al. Frontline Field Epidemiology Training Programs as a strategy to improve disease surveillance and response. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23:S166–17. DOIGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell  E, Tappero  JW, Ijaz  K, Bartee  M, Fernandez  J, Burris  H, et al.; CDC JEE Team and WHO Geneva JEE Secretariat. Joint External Evaluation—development and scale-up of global multisectoral health capacity evaluation process. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23:S33–9. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. World Health Organization. Joint External Evaluation Tool: international health regulations (2005), 2nd ed. Geneva: The Organization; 2018.
  8. Al Nsour  M, Khader  Y, Al Serouri  A, Bashier  H, Osman  S. Awareness and preparedness of Field Epidemiology Training Program graduates to respond to COVID-1 9 in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: cross-sectional study. JMIR Med Educ. 2020;6:e19047. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Al Serouri  AA, Ghaleb  YA, Al Aghbari  LA, Al Amad  MA, Alkohlani  AS, Almoayed  KA, et al. Field Epidemiology Training Program response to COVID-19 during a conflict: experience from Yemen. Front Public Health. 2021;9:688119. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Samy  S, Lami  F, Rashak  HA, Al Nsour  M, Eid  A, Khader  YS, et al. Public health workers’ knowledge, attitude and practice regarding COVID-19: the impact of Field Epidemiology Training Program in the Eastern Mediterranean Region. J Public Health (Oxf). 2021;43(Suppl 3):iii1–11. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Hu  AE, Fontaine  R, Turcios-Ruiz  R, Abedi  AA, Williams  S, Hilmers  A, et al. Field Epidemiology Training Programs contribute to COVID-19 preparedness and response globally. BMC Public Health. 2022;22:63. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. World Health Organization. COVID-19 Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan (SPRP 2021). 2021 [cited 2022 Sep 7]. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-WHE-2021.02
  13. World Health Organization.COVID-19 Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan. Operational planning guidelines to support country preparedness and response. 2020 [cited 2022 Sep 7]. https://extranet.who.int/sph/covid-19-strategic-preparedness-and-response-plan-operational-planning-guidelines-support-country
  14. Noman  H, Dureab  F, Ahmed  I, Al Serouri  A, Hussein  T, Jahn  A. Mind the gap: an analysis of core capacities of the International Health Regulations (2005) to respond to outbreaks in Yemen. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:477. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Noman  H, Dureab  F, Ahmed  I, Al Serouri  A, Hussein  T, Jahn  A. Correction to: Mind the gap: an analysis of core capacities of the International Health Regulations (2005) to respond to outbreaks in Yemen. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:677. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar

Main Article

Page created: October 19, 2022
Page updated: December 11, 2022
Page reviewed: December 11, 2022
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external