Scholarlink

Background <p>The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the urgent need for scalable, adaptable training programs to support public health preparedness and response. While many training initiatives emerged globally, their effectiveness, sustainability, and relevance to community needs remain uneven. This scoping review characterizes the landscape of pandemic-related training programs and identifies barriers, facilitators, and gaps in preparedness education for public health professionals, community-based organizations (CBOs), and frontline responders.</p> Methods <p>We conducted a scoping review of English-language peer-reviewed articles published between 2005 and 2023. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide data extraction and thematic synthesis, we examined training programs focused on pandemic preparedness, including design, delivery, implementation processes, and evaluation strategies.</p> Results <p>Thirty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. Training programs varied in scope, format, and target populations, with most focused on COVID-19 and conducted in low- and middle-income countries. Programs commonly emphasized contact tracing, epidemiology, surveillance, and community engagement. While virtual formats increased accessibility, participants often preferred in-person, interactive learning. Facilitators were associated with perceived success included strong partnerships, culturally tailored materials, and improvement through feedback, while barriers were associated with program challenges included limited infrastructure, unclear learning objectives, lack of sustained funding, and inadequate evaluation. Most programs were reactive and short-term, with minimal input from community stakeholders. Trust, equity, and cultural responsiveness emerged as central themes.</p> Conclusions <p>Preparedness training programs remain fragmented and overly reliant on crisis-driven implementation. Future programs would benefit from prioritizing sustained investment, co-design with community partners, and use of validated frameworks like CFIR to guide development and evaluation. Strengthening the capacity of CBOs and embedding preparedness within trusted community networks are essential to building equitable and resilient public health systems.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Pandemic ready or playing catch-up? A scoping review of public health training programs for pandemic preparedness and response efforts

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月15日

查看全文
  • Kelsey Burton,
  • Janae Best,
  • Jamie DeCoster,
  • Tiarney D. Ritchwood

摘要

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the urgent need for scalable, adaptable training programs to support public health preparedness and response. While many training initiatives emerged globally, their effectiveness, sustainability, and relevance to community needs remain uneven. This scoping review characterizes the landscape of pandemic-related training programs and identifies barriers, facilitators, and gaps in preparedness education for public health professionals, community-based organizations (CBOs), and frontline responders.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review of English-language peer-reviewed articles published between 2005 and 2023. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide data extraction and thematic synthesis, we examined training programs focused on pandemic preparedness, including design, delivery, implementation processes, and evaluation strategies.

Results

Thirty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. Training programs varied in scope, format, and target populations, with most focused on COVID-19 and conducted in low- and middle-income countries. Programs commonly emphasized contact tracing, epidemiology, surveillance, and community engagement. While virtual formats increased accessibility, participants often preferred in-person, interactive learning. Facilitators were associated with perceived success included strong partnerships, culturally tailored materials, and improvement through feedback, while barriers were associated with program challenges included limited infrastructure, unclear learning objectives, lack of sustained funding, and inadequate evaluation. Most programs were reactive and short-term, with minimal input from community stakeholders. Trust, equity, and cultural responsiveness emerged as central themes.

Conclusions

Preparedness training programs remain fragmented and overly reliant on crisis-driven implementation. Future programs would benefit from prioritizing sustained investment, co-design with community partners, and use of validated frameworks like CFIR to guide development and evaluation. Strengthening the capacity of CBOs and embedding preparedness within trusted community networks are essential to building equitable and resilient public health systems.