Public Health Overview

Introduction #

Public health is the science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life, and promoting health through organized efforts of society [1]. Unlike clinical medicine, which focuses on treating individual patients, public health employs population-based strategies to improve health outcomes across entire communities [2]. Understanding public health principles is essential for physicians, as approximately 70% of health outcomes are determined by social, behavioral, and environmental factors rather than medical care alone [3].

Epidemiology Fundamentals #

Measures of Disease Frequency

Incidence represents the number of new cases of disease occurring in a defined population during a specified time period, typically expressed as cases per population per year [4]. Incidence reflects the rate at which disease develops and is crucial for identifying disease risk factors [5]. Prevalence measures the proportion of a population affected by a disease at a specific point in time, calculated as the number of existing cases divided by the total population [4]. The relationship between incidence and prevalence depends on disease duration: prevalence approximately equals incidence multiplied by average disease duration for stable conditions [6].

Mortality rate quantifies deaths in a population, while case fatality rate represents the proportion of individuals with a disease who die from it, serving as a measure of disease severity [7]. Attack rate is used in outbreak investigations to describe the proportion of exposed individuals who develop disease [8].

Study Designs

Cohort studies follow groups of individuals over time to assess disease development based on exposure status [9]. In prospective cohort studies, participants are enrolled before disease occurrence and followed forward, allowing direct calculation of incidence and relative risk [10]. Retrospective cohort studies use existing records to reconstruct exposures and outcomes [11]. Cohort studies provide strong evidence for causation but require large sample sizes and prolonged follow-up periods [12].

Case-control studies compare individuals with disease (cases) to those without disease (controls) to identify exposure differences [13]. These studies are efficient for rare diseases and multiple exposures but are susceptible to recall bias and cannot directly calculate incidence [14]. The odds ratio approximates relative risk when disease prevalence is low [15].

Cross-sectional studies measure exposure and outcome simultaneously in a defined population, providing prevalence data but limited causal inference due to temporal ambiguity [16]. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) randomly assign participants to intervention or control groups, minimizing confounding and providing the strongest evidence for treatment efficacy [17]. However, RCTs may have limited generalizability due to strict inclusion criteria [18].

Ecological studies analyze population-level rather than individual-level data, examining correlations between aggregate exposures and outcomes [19]. While useful for hypothesis generation, these studies are vulnerable to ecological fallacy, where population-level associations do not reflect individual-level relationships [20].

Bias and Confounding

Selection bias occurs when study participants differ systematically from the target population, compromising generalizability [21]. Berkson’s bias affects hospital-based case-control studies when hospitalization rates differ between cases and controls [22]. Information bias arises from systematic measurement errors, including recall bias when cases remember exposures differently than controls [23].

Confounding occurs when an extraneous variable is associated with both exposure and outcome, distorting the true relationship [24]. Confounders must be independently associated with disease risk and correlated with the exposure of interest [25]. Randomization, restriction, matching, and stratified analysis help control confounding in study design and analysis [26].

Lead-time bias artificially inflates survival duration when screening detects disease earlier without affecting actual survival [27]. Length-time bias occurs when screening preferentially detects slowly progressive cases with better prognosis [28].

Causation

The Bradford Hill criteria provide a framework for assessing causality from observational data [29]. Key criteria include: temporal relationship (exposure precedes outcome), strength of association (strong relative risks suggest causation), dose-response relationship (increasing exposure correlates with increasing risk), consistency (replication across different populations and settings), biological plausibility (coherence with existing knowledge), specificity (exposure associated with specific outcome), and experimental evidence (intervention studies demonstrating effect) [30]. However, these criteria are guidelines rather than absolute requirements, and causation can exist without meeting all criteria [31].

Biostatistics #

Measures of Association

Relative risk (RR) compares disease incidence between exposed and unexposed groups, calculated as the ratio of incidence rates [32]. RR greater than 1 indicates increased risk, less than 1 suggests protection, and equal to 1 implies no association [33]. Attributable risk quantifies the excess disease incidence in exposed individuals compared to unexposed, representing the disease burden attributable to exposure [34].

Odds ratio (OR) compares the odds of exposure among cases versus controls in case-control studies [35]. When disease is rare, OR approximates RR [36]. ORs are also used in logistic regression analysis for binary outcomes [37].

Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values

Sensitivity measures the proportion of individuals with disease who test positive, calculated as true positives divided by all diseased individuals [38]. High sensitivity is crucial for screening tests, as it minimizes false negatives [39]. Specificity represents the proportion of disease-free individuals who test negative, calculated as true negatives divided by all disease-free individuals [40]. High specificity reduces false positives and is important for confirmatory testing [41].

Positive predictive value (PPV) indicates the probability that a positive test result represents true disease, while negative predictive value (NPV) represents the probability that a negative test indicates true absence of disease [42]. Unlike sensitivity and specificity (which are intrinsic test characteristics), predictive values depend on disease prevalence in the tested population [43]. As prevalence increases, PPV increases while NPV decreases [44].

Likelihood ratios combine sensitivity and specificity to estimate post-test probability [45]. Positive likelihood ratio (LR+) equals sensitivity divided by (1-specificity), while negative likelihood ratio (LR-) equals (1-sensitivity) divided by specificity [46]. LR+ greater than 10 or LR- less than 0.1 indicates strong diagnostic value [47].

Statistical Testing

Null hypothesis significance testing evaluates whether observed differences could arise by chance [48]. The p-value represents the probability of obtaining results as extreme as those observed if the null hypothesis were true [49]. By convention, p<0.05 is considered statistically significant, indicating less than 5% probability the results occurred by chance [50].

Type I error (α) occurs when the null hypothesis is incorrectly rejected (false positive), with significance level typically set at 0.05 [51]. Type II error (β) occurs when the null hypothesis is incorrectly accepted (false negative) [52]. Statistical power equals 1-β and represents the probability of detecting a true effect [53]. Power increases with larger sample size, greater effect size, and higher significance threshold [54].

Confidence intervals provide a range of plausible values for population parameters based on sample data [55]. A 95% confidence interval means that if the study were repeated many times, 95% of calculated intervals would contain the true population value [56]. Confidence intervals that exclude the null value (e.g., RR=1) indicate statistical significance [57].

Meta-Analysis and Systematic Reviews

Meta-analysis statistically combines results from multiple studies to increase power and precision [58]. By pooling data, meta-analyses can detect smaller effects and resolve contradictory findings [59]. However, meta-analyses are vulnerable to publication bias, where studies with negative or null results are less likely to be published [60]. Funnel plots help detect publication bias by plotting effect sizes against study precision [61].

Screening and Prevention #

Prevention Levels

Primary prevention aims to prevent disease occurrence through interventions like vaccination, health education, and environmental modifications [62]. Examples include immunization programs, smoking cessation initiatives, and water fluoridation [63]. Secondary prevention involves early disease detection through screening programs, enabling intervention before symptoms develop [64]. Cervical cancer screening, mammography, and blood pressure monitoring exemplify secondary prevention [65]. Tertiary prevention focuses on limiting disability and complications in individuals with established disease through treatment and rehabilitation [66].

Screening Principles

Effective screening programs must meet several criteria established by Wilson and Jungner [67]. The condition should be an important health problem with recognizable early stages [68]. An effective treatment must exist, and early intervention should improve outcomes compared to treatment after symptom onset [69]. The screening test should be acceptable, safe, and have adequate sensitivity and specificity [70]. Screening should be cost-effective, with resources balanced against other healthcare priorities [71].

Lead-time bias can make screening appear beneficial by advancing diagnosis without improving actual survival [72]. Overdiagnosis occurs when screening detects indolent conditions that would never have caused clinical harm, potentially leading to unnecessary treatment [73]. For example, some prostate and thyroid cancers detected through screening may never progress to cause symptoms [74].

U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) provides evidence-based recommendations for clinical preventive services [75]. Recommendations are graded A through D, with I indicating insufficient evidence [76]. Grade A recommendations indicate high certainty of substantial net benefit and should be offered to eligible patients [77]. Grade B recommendations indicate high certainty of moderate net benefit or moderate certainty of moderate-to-substantial benefit [78]. Grade C services have small net benefit and should be offered selectively based on individual circumstances [79]. Grade D recommendations should not be routinely provided due to moderate or high certainty of no benefit or harms outweighing benefits [80].

Infectious Disease Epidemiology #

Disease Transmission

Direct transmission occurs through physical contact, respiratory droplets, or vertical transmission from mother to child [81]. Indirect transmission involves intermediate vectors (like mosquitoes for malaria) or vehicles (like contaminated water for cholera) [82]. Airborne transmission occurs through droplet nuclei that can remain suspended and travel long distances, as with tuberculosis and measles [83].

The basic reproductive number (R₀) represents the average number of secondary cases generated by one infected individual in a completely susceptible population [84]. When R₀ exceeds 1, an epidemic can occur; when R₀ is less than 1, the infection will die out [85]. Herd immunity threshold equals 1-(1/R₀), representing the proportion of immune individuals needed to prevent sustained transmission [86].

Outbreak Investigation

Outbreak investigations follow systematic steps: verify the outbreak, confirm diagnoses, establish case definitions, conduct case finding, perform descriptive epidemiology (characterizing cases by time, place, and person), develop hypotheses, test hypotheses through analytical studies, implement control measures, and communicate findings [87]. Epidemic curves plot cases over time to characterize outbreak patterns [88]. Point-source outbreaks show rapid rises and falls, while propagated outbreaks demonstrate successive peaks separated by disease incubation periods [89].

Vaccine Effectiveness

Vaccine efficacy measured in clinical trials represents the percentage reduction in disease incidence among vaccinated versus unvaccinated individuals [90]. Vaccine effectiveness refers to real-world performance under actual use conditions [91]. Vaccines provide individual protection but also contribute to herd immunity by reducing transmission [92]. However, vaccine hesitancy threatens herd immunity thresholds for highly contagious diseases [93].

Healthcare Systems and Policy #

Healthcare Organization

The U.S. healthcare system combines private insurance, employer-sponsored coverage, and public programs including Medicare (for individuals ≥65 years or with disabilities), Medicaid (for low-income individuals), and the Children’s Health Insurance Program [94]. The Affordable Care Act expanded Medicaid eligibility and established health insurance marketplaces [95]. Despite high per-capita spending, the U.S. has lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality than many other high-income nations [96].

Managed care organizations integrate financing and delivery of healthcare services [97]. Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) require members to use network providers and obtain referrals for specialist care [98]. Preferred Provider Organizations (PPOs) offer greater flexibility with out-of-network coverage at higher cost [99].

Quality Measurement and Patient Safety

Healthcare quality encompasses effectiveness, safety, patient-centeredness, timeliness, efficiency, and equity [100]. Structure measures assess healthcare system capacity and organization, process measures evaluate adherence to evidence-based practices, and outcome measures quantify health results [101].

Adverse events are unintended injuries caused by medical management rather than underlying disease [102]. The Institute of Medicine report “To Err is Human” estimated that medical errors cause 44,000-98,000 deaths annually in U.S. hospitals [103]. Root cause analysis investigates underlying systems failures contributing to adverse events [104]. Effective patient safety strategies include standardized protocols, electronic health records with clinical decision support, medication reconciliation, and safety culture promotion [105].

Evidence-Based Medicine

Evidence-based medicine integrates clinical expertise, patient values, and best available evidence to guide clinical decisions [106]. The evidence hierarchy ranks study designs by rigor, with systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs providing the strongest evidence, followed by individual RCTs, cohort studies, case-control studies, case series, and expert opinion [107]. Clinical practice guidelines synthesize evidence to provide recommendations for specific clinical scenarios [108]. However, guidelines may lag behind emerging evidence or reflect conflicts of interest when industry-funded [109].

Social and Behavioral Determinants of Health #

Social Determinants

Social determinants of health include economic stability, education, healthcare access, neighborhood environment, and social context [110]. Lower socioeconomic status correlates with increased morbidity and mortality across nearly all conditions [111]. Educational attainment influences health literacy, employment opportunities, and health behaviors [112]. Residential segregation and neighborhood disadvantage contribute to health disparities through reduced access to healthy foods, safe recreational spaces, and quality healthcare [113].

Health disparities are systematic differences in health outcomes between population groups [114]. Racial and ethnic minorities experience higher rates of infant mortality, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and certain cancers compared to non-Hispanic whites [115]. Disparities persist even after adjusting for socioeconomic factors, suggesting additional contributions from discrimination, chronic stress, and healthcare system biases [116].

Health Behavior Theory

The Health Belief Model proposes that health behaviors depend on perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, cues to action, and self-efficacy [117]. The Transtheoretical Model describes behavior change as progressing through stages: precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance, and termination [118]. Social Cognitive Theory emphasizes reciprocal interactions between personal factors, behavior, and environment, with self-efficacy as a key determinant [119].

Substance Use Epidemiology

Tobacco use remains the leading preventable cause of death in the United States, responsible for approximately 480,000 deaths annually [120]. Smoking increases risks of lung cancer, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and numerous other conditions [121]. Secondhand smoke exposure causes cardiovascular disease and lung cancer in nonsmokers [122].

Alcohol use contributes to liver disease, certain cancers, cardiovascular disease, and injuries [123]. Excessive alcohol consumption causes approximately 95,000 deaths annually in the U.S. [124]. Opioid overdose deaths have increased dramatically, with synthetic opioids like fentanyl now the primary driver [125]. Medication-assisted treatment combining pharmacotherapy (methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone) with behavioral interventions improves outcomes for opioid use disorder [126].

Environmental and Occupational Health #

Environmental Exposures

Lead exposure causes neurodevelopmental toxicity in children, with no safe blood lead level identified [127]. Historical sources included leaded gasoline and lead-based paint, while contemporary exposures occur through contaminated water, soil, and imported products [128]. Mercury bioaccumulates in fish, with methylmercury causing neurodevelopmental effects in fetuses and young children [129]. Pregnant women and young children should limit consumption of high-mercury fish [130].

Air pollution contributes to respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, and premature mortality [131]. Particulate matter, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide are criteria air pollutants regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency [132]. Wildfire smoke has emerged as a significant air quality threat, with particulate matter from fires causing acute respiratory symptoms and exacerbating chronic conditions [133].

Occupational Health

Occupational exposures account for substantial disease burden, with pneumoconioses (asbestosis, silicosis, coal workers’ pneumoconiosis) resulting from inhaled particulates [134]. Asbestos causes lung cancer, mesothelioma, and asbestosis, with latency periods of 20-40 years [135]. Despite regulations, asbestos remains present in older buildings [136].

Occupational injuries represent a major public health concern, with construction, agriculture, and transportation industries having particularly high fatality rates [137]. Effective workplace safety programs include hazard identification, engineering controls, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment following the hierarchy of controls [138].

Global Health #

Disease Burden Measurement

Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) combine years of life lost due to premature mortality and years lived with disability, providing a comprehensive measure of disease burden [139]. Globally, ischemic heart disease, stroke, and lower respiratory infections cause the greatest DALY burden [140]. Communicable diseases, maternal and neonatal conditions, and nutritional deficiencies account for a larger proportion of disease burden in low-income countries compared to high-income countries, where non-communicable diseases predominate [141].

Major Global Health Challenges

Malaria caused an estimated 247 million cases and 619,000 deaths in 2021, predominantly in sub-Saharan Africa [142]. Prevention includes insecticide-treated bed nets, indoor residual spraying, and intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy [143]. The RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine has demonstrated modest efficacy and received WHO recommendation for use in children in high-transmission areas [144].

Tuberculosis remains a leading infectious disease killer, with 10.6 million new cases and 1.6 million deaths in 2021 [145]. The HIV epidemic amplifies tuberculosis burden, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa [146]. Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis poses a major treatment challenge [147].

HIV/AIDS has caused approximately 40 million deaths since the epidemic began [148]. Antiretroviral therapy has transformed HIV from a fatal disease to a manageable chronic condition in settings with treatment access [149]. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) prevents HIV acquisition in high-risk populations [150]. However, sub-Saharan Africa continues to bear a disproportionate burden, accounting for approximately two-thirds of people living with HIV [151].

Maternal and Child Health

Globally, approximately 287,000 women died from pregnancy-related causes in 2020, with maternal mortality ratios highest in sub-Saharan Africa [152]. Leading causes include hemorrhage, hypertensive disorders, sepsis, and unsafe abortion [153]. Skilled birth attendance, emergency obstetric care access, and family planning reduce maternal mortality [154].

Under-five mortality has declined substantially but remains high in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia [155]. Pneumonia, diarrhea, malaria, and neonatal conditions account for most child deaths [156]. Effective interventions include vaccination, oral rehydration therapy, appropriate infant feeding, and treatment of common childhood illnesses [157].

Health Systems Strengthening

The WHO framework identifies six health system building blocks: service delivery, health workforce, health information systems, medical products and technologies, financing, and leadership/governance [158]. Strengthening health systems requires adequate financing, sufficient trained healthcare workers, reliable supply chains, and robust surveillance systems [159]. Task-shifting strategies can address workforce shortages by delegating tasks to less specialized health workers with appropriate training and supervision [160].

References #

[1] Schneider MJ. Introduction to Public Health. 4th ed. Jones & Bartlett Learning; 2014. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301519.001.0001

[2] Frieden TR. A framework for public health action: the health impact pyramid. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(4):590-595. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.185652

[3] McGinnis JM, Williams-Russo P, Knickman JR. The case for more active policy attention to health promotion. Health Aff (Millwood). 2002;21(2):78-93. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.21.2.78

[4] Porta M, editor. A Dictionary of Epidemiology. 6th ed. Oxford University Press; 2014. https://doi.org/10.1093/acref/9780199976720.001.0001

[5] Rothman KJ. Epidemiology: An Introduction. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press; 2012. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyu006

[6] Freeman J, Hutchison GB. Prevalence, incidence and duration. Am J Epidemiol. 1980;112(5):707-723. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113043

[7] Gerstman BB. Epidemiology Kept Simple: An Introduction to Traditional and Modern Epidemiology. 3rd ed. Wiley-Blackwell; 2013. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118741238

[8] Gordis L. Epidemiology. 5th ed. Elsevier Saunders; 2014.

[9] Grimes DA, Schulz KF. Cohort studies: marching towards outcomes. Lancet. 2002;359(9303):341-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07500-1

[10] Mann CJ. Observational research methods. Research design II: cohort, cross sectional, and case-control studies. Emerg Med J. 2003;20(1):54-60. https://doi.org/10.1136/emj.20.1.54

[11] Dekkers OM, Egger M, Altman DG, Vandenbroucke JP. Distinguishing case series from cohort studies. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(1 Pt 1):37-40. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-156-1-201201030-00006

[12] Song JW, Chung KC. Observational studies: cohort and case-control studies. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126(6):2234-2242. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f44abc

[13] Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Case-control studies: research in reverse. Lancet. 2002;359(9304):431-434. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07605-5

[14] Sedgwick P. Case-control studies: advantages and disadvantages. BMJ. 2014;348:f7707. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f7707

[15] Greenland S, Thomas DC. On the need for the rare disease assumption in case-control studies. Am J Epidemiol. 1982;116(3):547-553. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113439

[16] Levin KA. Study design III: Cross-sectional studies. Evid Based Dent. 2006;7(1):24-25. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6400375

[17] Friedman LM, Furberg CD, DeMets DL, Reboussin DM, Granger CB. Fundamentals of Clinical Trials. 5th ed. Springer; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18539-2

[18] Rothwell PM. External validity of randomised controlled trials: “to whom do the results of this trial apply?” Lancet. 2005;365(9453):82-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17670-8

[19] Morgenstern H. Ecologic studies in epidemiology: concepts, principles, and methods. Annu Rev Public Health. 1995;16:61-81. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pu.16.050195.000425

[20] Schwartz S. The fallacy of the ecological fallacy: the potential misuse of a concept and the consequences. Am J Public Health. 1994;84(5):819-824. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.84.5.819

[21] Rothman KJ, Gallacher JE, Hatch EE. Why representativeness should be avoided. Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42(4):1012-1014. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dys223

[22] Berkson J. Limitations of the application of fourfold table analysis to hospital data. Biometrics Bull. 1946;2(3):47-53. https://doi.org/10.2307/3002000

[23] Althubaiti A. Information bias in health research: definition, pitfalls, and adjustment methods. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2016;9:211-217. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S104807

[24] Jager KJ, Zoccali C, Macleod A, Dekker FW. Confounding: what it is and how to deal with it. Kidney Int. 2008;73(3):256-260. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ki.5002650

[25] Pourhoseingholi MA, Baghestani AR, Vahedi M. How to control confounding effects by statistical analysis. Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench. 2012;5(2):79-83.

[26] Mansournia MA, Higgins JP, Sterne JA, Hernán MA. Biases in randomized trials: a conversation between trialists and epidemiologists. Epidemiology. 2017;28(1):54-59. https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0000000000000564

[27] Duffy SW, Nagtegaal ID, Wallis M, et al. Correcting for lead time and length bias in estimating the effect of screen detection on cancer survival. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;168(1):98-104. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwn120

[28] Zahl PH, Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC. Lead-time models should not be used to estimate overdiagnosis in cancer screening. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(9):1283-1286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-014-2812-2

[29] Hill AB. The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc R Soc Med. 1965;58(5):295-300. https://doi.org/10.1177/003591576505800503

[30] Fedak KM, Bernal A, Capshaw ZA, Gross S. Applying the Bradford Hill criteria in the 21st century: how data integration has changed causal inference in molecular epidemiology. Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2015;12:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12982-015-0037-4

[31] Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Causation and causal inference in epidemiology. Am J Public Health. 2005;95 Suppl 1(S1):S144-S150. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2004.059204

[32] Zhang J, Yu KF. What’s the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes. JAMA. 1998;280(19):1690-1691. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.19.1690

[33] Sedgwick P. Relative risks versus odds ratios. BMJ. 2014;348:g1407. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g1407

[34] Rockhill B, Newman B, Weinberg C. Use and misuse of population attributable fractions. Am J Public Health. 1998;88(1):15-19. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.88.1.15

[35] Szumilas M. Explaining odds ratios. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2010;19(3):227-229.

[36] Davies HT, Crombie IK, Tavakoli M. When can odds ratios mislead? BMJ. 1998;316(7136):989-991. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7136.989

[37] Ranganathan P, Pramesh CS, Aggarwal R. Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: Logistic regression. Perspect Clin Res. 2017;8(3):148-151. https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_87_17

[38] Parikh R, Mathai A, Parikh S, Sekhar GC, Thomas R. Understanding and using sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2008;56(1):45-50. https://doi.org/10.4103/0301-4738.37595

[39] Lalkhen AG, McCluskey A. Clinical tests: sensitivity and specificity. Contin Educ Anaesth Crit Care Pain. 2008;8(6):221-223. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjaceaccp/mkn041

[40] Trevethan R. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values: foundations, pliabilities, and pitfalls in research and practice. Front Public Health. 2017;5:307. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00307

[41] Šimundić AM. Measures of diagnostic accuracy: basic definitions. EJIFCC. 2009;19(4):203-211.

[42] Altman DG, Bland JM. Diagnostic tests 2: predictive values. BMJ. 1994;309(6947):102. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.309.6947.102

[43] Brenner H, Gefeller O. Variation of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values with disease prevalence. Stat Med. 1997;16(9):981-991. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19970515)16:9<981::AID-SIM510>3.0.CO;2-N

[44] Baratloo A, Hosseini M, Negida A, El Ashal G. Part 1: Simple definition and calculation of accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. Emerg (Tehran). 2015;3(2):48-49.

[45] McGee S. Simplifying likelihood ratios. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17(8):646-649. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.10750.x

[46] Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Diagnostic tests 4: likelihood ratios. BMJ. 2004;329(7458):168-169. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.329.7458.168

[47] Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL. Users’ guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? JAMA. 1994;271(9):703-707. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1994.03510330081039

[48] Goodman SN. Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 1: The P value fallacy. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130(12):995-1004. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-130-12-199906150-00008

[49] Wasserstein RL, Lazar NA. The ASA statement on p-values: context, process, and purpose. Am Stat. 2016;70(2):129-133. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108

[50] Greenland S, Senn SJ, Rothman KJ, et al. Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations. Eur J Epidemiol. 2016;31(4):337-350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-016-0149-3

[51] Banerjee A, Chitnis UB, Jadhav SL, Bhawalkar JS, Chaudhury S. Hypothesis testing, type I and type II errors. Ind Psychiatry J. 2009;18(2):127-131. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-6748.62274

[52] Andrade C. The P value and statistical significance: misunderstandings, explanations, challenges, and alternatives. Indian J Psychol Med. 2019;41(3):210-215. https://doi.org/10.4103/IJPSYM.IJPSYM_193_19

[53] Button KS, Ioannidis JP, Mokrysz C, et al. Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013;14(5):365-376. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3475

[54] Chow SC, Wang H, Shao J. Sample Size Calculations in Clinical Research. 2nd ed. Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2007. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781584889830

[55] Cumming G. Understanding the New Statistics: Effect Sizes, Confidence Intervals, and Meta-Analysis. Routledge; 2012. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203807002

[56] Morey RD, Hoekstra R, Rouder JN, Lee MD, Wagenmakers EJ. The fallacy of placing confidence in confidence intervals. Psychon Bull Rev. 2016;23(1):103-123. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0947-8

[57] Gardner MJ, Altman DG. Confidence intervals rather than P values: estimation rather than hypothesis testing. BMJ. 1986;292(6522):746-750. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.292.6522.746

[58] Egger M, Smith GD, Phillips AN. Meta-analysis: principles and procedures. BMJ. 1997;315(7121):1533-1537. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7121.1533

[59] Ioannidis JP. The mass production of redundant, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Milbank Q. 2016;94(3):485-514. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12210

[60] Thornton A, Lee P. Publication bias in meta-analysis: its causes and consequences. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(2):207-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00161-4

[61] Sterne JA, Egger M. Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: guidelines on choice of axis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54(10):1046-1055. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00377-8

[62] Kisling LA, Das JM. Prevention Strategies. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2023.

[63] Brownson RC, Baker EA, Deshpande AD, Gillespie KN. Evidence-Based Public Health. 3rd ed. Oxford University Press; 2017.

[64] Raffle AE, Gray JAM. Screening: Evidence and Practice. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press; 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780198805984.001.0001

[65] Smith RA, Andrews KS, Brooks D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2019: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(3):184-210. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21557

[66] Kuehn BM. Tertiary prevention. JAMA. 2007;298(20):2346. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.20.2346-a

[67] Wilson JMG, Jungner G. Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease. World Health Organization; 1968.

[68] Andermann A, Blancquaert I, Beauchamp S, Déry V. Revisiting Wilson and Jungner in the genomic age: a review of screening criteria over the past 40 years. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86(4):317-319. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.07.050112

[69] Harris R, Sawaya GF, Moyer VA, Calonge N. Reconsidering the criteria for evaluating proposed screening programs: reflections from 4 current and former members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Epidemiol Rev. 2011;33(1):20-35. https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxr005

[70] Petticrew MP, Sowden AJ, Lister-Sharp D, Wright K. False-negative results in screening programmes: systematic review of impact and implications. Health Technol Assess. 2000;4(5):1-120. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta4050

[71] Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 4th ed. Oxford University Press; 2015.

[72] Brawley OW. Prostate cancer screening: what we know, don’t know, and believe. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(2):135-136. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-157-2-201207170-00460

[73] Welch HG, Black WC. Overdiagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(9):605-613. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djq099

[74] Esserman LJ, Thompson IM, Reid B. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: an opportunity for improvement. JAMA. 2013;310(8):797-798. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.108415

[75] Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, et al. Screening for lung cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2021;325(10):962-970. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.1117

[76] US Preventive Services Task Force. Grade definitions. Updated 2018. Accessed November 2024. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/about-uspstf/methods-and-processes/grade-definitions

[77] Davidson KW, Barry MJ, Mangione CM, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2021;325(19):1965-1977. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.6238

[78] Siu AL; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(4):279-296. https://doi.org/10.7326/M15-2886

[79] Moyer VA; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(2):120-134. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-157-2-201207170-00459

[80] Grossman DC, Curry SJ, Owens DK, et al. Vitamin D, calcium, or combined supplementation for the primary prevention of fractures in community-dwelling adults: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2018;319(15):1592-1599. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.3185

[81] Siegel JD, Rhinehart E, Jackson M, Chiarello L; Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. 2007 guideline for isolation precautions: preventing transmission of infectious agents in healthcare settings. Am J Infect Control. 2007;35(10 Suppl 2):S65-S164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2007.10.007

[82] Otter JA, Yezli S, French GL. The role played by contaminated surfaces in the transmission of nosocomial pathogens. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011;32(7):687-699. https://doi.org/10.1086/660363

[83] Tellier R, Li Y, Cowling BJ, Tang JW. Recognition of aerosol transmission of infectious agents: a commentary. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):101. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-019-3707-y

[84] Delamater PL, Street EJ, Leslie TF, Yang YT, Jacobsen KH. Complexity of the basic reproduction number (R0). Emerg Infect Dis. 2019;25(1):1-4. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2501.171901

[85] Diekmann O, Heesterbeek JA, Metz JA. On the definition and the computation of the basic reproduction ratio R0 in models for infectious diseases in heterogeneous populations. J Math Biol. 1990;28(4):365-382. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00178324

[86] Fine P, Eames K, Heymann DL. “Herd immunity”: a rough guide. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52(7):911-916. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cir007

[87] Reingold A. Outbreak investigations—a perspective. Emerg Infect Dis. 1998;4(1):21-27. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid0401.980104

[88] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Principles of Epidemiology in Public Health Practice. 3rd ed. 2012.

[89] Nsubuga P, White ME, Thacker SB, et al. Public health surveillance: a tool for targeting and monitoring interventions. In: Jamison DT, Breman JG, Measham AR, et al., eds. Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries. 2nd ed. World Bank; 2006.

[90] Weinberg GA, Szilagyi PG. Vaccine epidemiology: efficacy, effectiveness, and the translational research roadmap. J Infect Dis. 2010;201(11):1607-1610. https://doi.org/10.1086/652404

[91] Orenstein WA, Bernier RH, Dondero TJ, et al. Field evaluation of vaccine efficacy. Bull World Health Organ. 1985;63(6):1055-1068.

[92] Plotkin SA. Correlates of protection induced by vaccination. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2010;17(7):1055-1065. https://doi.org/10.1128/CVI.00131-10

[93] Dubé E, Laberge C, Guay M, Bramadat P, Roy R, Bettinger JA. Vaccine hesitancy: an overview. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013;9(8):1763-1773. https://doi.org/10.4161/hv.24657

[94] Sommers BD, Gawande AA, Baicker K. Health insurance coverage and health – what the recent evidence tells us. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(6):586-593. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsb1706645

[95] Obama B. United States health care reform: progress to date and next steps. JAMA. 2016;316(5):525-532. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.9797

[96] Woolf SH, Aron LY. The US health disadvantage relative to other high-income countries: findings from a National Research Council/Institute of Medicine report. JAMA. 2013;309(8):771-772. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.91

[97] Robinson JC. Theory and practice in the design of physician payment incentives. Milbank Q. 2001;79(2):149-177. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.00202

[98] Miller RH, Luft HS. Managed care plan performance since 1980: a literature analysis. JAMA. 1994;271(19):1512-1519. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1994.03510430066037

[99] Gabel J, Levitt L, Pickreign J, et al. Job-based health insurance in 2000: premiums rise sharply while coverage grows. Health Aff (Millwood). 2000;19(5):144-151. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.19.5.144

[100] Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. National Academies Press; 2001. https://doi.org/10.17226/10027

[101] Donabedian A. The quality of care: how can it be assessed? JAMA. 1988;260(12):1743-1748. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1988.03410120089033

[102] Leape LL, Brennan TA, Laird N, et al. The nature of adverse events in hospitalized patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study II. N Engl J Med. 1991;324(6):377-384. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199102073240605

[103] Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, eds. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. National Academies Press; 2000. https://doi.org/10.17226/9728

[104] Wu AW, Lipshutz AK, Pronovost PJ. Effectiveness and efficiency of root cause analysis in medicine. JAMA. 2008;299(6):685-687. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.299.6.685

[105] Pronovost PJ, Berenholtz SM, Goeschel CA, et al. Creating high reliability in health care organizations. Health Serv Res. 2006;41(4 Pt 2):1599-1617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00567.x

[106] Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ. 1996;312(7023):71-72. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71

[107] Burns PB, Rohrich RJ, Chung KC. The levels of evidence and their role in evidence-based medicine. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128(1):305-310. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e318219c171

[108] Qaseem A, Forland F, Macbeth F, Ollenschläger G, Phillips S, van der Wees P; Board of Trustees of the Guidelines International Network. Guidelines International Network: toward international standards for clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(7):525-531. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-156-7-201204030-00009

[109] Lenzer J. Why we can’t trust clinical guidelines. BMJ. 2013;346:f3830. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f3830

[110] Braveman P, Gottlieb L. The social determinants of health: it’s time to consider the causes of the causes. Public Health Rep. 2014;129 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):19-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549141291S206

[111] Adler NE, Newman K. Socioeconomic disparities in health: pathways and policies. Health Aff (Millwood). 2002;21(2):60-76. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.21.2.60

[112] Berkman ND, Sheridan SL, Donahue KE, Halpern DJ, Crotty K. Low health literacy and health outcomes: an updated systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(2):97-107. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-2-201107190-00005

[113] Williams DR, Collins C. Racial residential segregation: a fundamental cause of racial disparities in health. Public Health Rep. 2001;116(5):404-416. https://doi.org/10.1093/phr/116.5.404

[114] Braveman P. Health disparities and health equity: concepts and measurement. Annu Rev Public Health. 2006;27:167-194. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.27.021405.102103

[115] Williams DR, Mohammed SA, Leavell J, Collins C. Race, socioeconomic status, and health: complexities, ongoing challenges, and research opportunities. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010;1186:69-101. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05339.x

[116] Smedley BD, Stith AY, Nelson AR, eds. Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care. National Academies Press; 2003. https://doi.org/10.17226/12875

[117] Champion VL, Skinner CS. The health belief model. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 4th ed. Jossey-Bass; 2008:45-65.

[118] Prochaska JO, Velicer WF. The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Am J Health Promot. 1997;12(1):38-48. https://doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-12.1.38

[119] Bandura A. Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Educ Behav. 2004;31(2):143-164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198104263660

[120] US Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2014.

[121] Jha P, Peto R. Global effects of smoking, of quitting, and of taxing tobacco. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(1):60-68. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1308383

[122] Öberg M, Jaakkola MS, Woodward A, Peruga A, Prüss-Ustün A. Worldwide burden of disease from exposure to second-hand smoke: a retrospective analysis of data from 192 countries. Lancet. 2011;377(9760):139-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61388-8

[123] Rehm J, Baliunas D, Borges GL, et al. The relation between different dimensions of alcohol consumption and burden of disease: an overview. Addiction. 2010;105(5):817-843. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.02899.x

[124] Esser MB, Sherk A, Liu Y, et al. Deaths and years of potential life lost from excessive alcohol use – United States, 2011-2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(39):1428-1433. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6939a6

[125] Mattson CL, Tanz LJ, Quinn K, Kariisa M, Patel P, Davis NL. Trends and geographic patterns in drug and synthetic opioid overdose deaths – United States, 2013-2019. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021;70(6):202-207. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7006a4

[126] Sordo L, Barrio G, Bravo MJ, et al. Mortality risk during and after opioid substitution treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. BMJ. 2017;357:j1550. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j1550

[127] Lanphear BP, Hornung R, Khoury J, et al. Low-level environmental lead exposure and children’s intellectual function: an international pooled analysis. Environ Health Perspect. 2005;113(7):894-899. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.7688

[128] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC’s childhood lead poisoning prevention program. Updated 2021. Accessed November 2024.

[129] Clarkson TW, Magos L. The toxicology of mercury and its chemical compounds. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2006;36(8):609-662. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408440600845619

[130] Oken E, Wright RO, Kleinman KP, et al. Maternal fish consumption, hair mercury, and infant cognition in a U.S. cohort. Environ Health Perspect. 2005;113(10):1376-1380. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.8041

[131] Lelieveld J, Klingmüller K, Pozzer A, et al. Cardiovascular disease burden from ambient air pollution in Europe reassessed using novel hazard ratio functions. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(20):1590-1596. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz135

[132] Brook RD, Rajagopalan S, Pope CA 3rd, et al. Particulate matter air pollution and cardiovascular disease: an update to the scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2010;121(21):2331-2378. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0b013e3181dbece1

[133] Reid CE, Brauer M, Johnston FH, et al. Critical review of health impacts of wildfire smoke exposure. Environ Health Perspect. 2016;124(9):1334-1343. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409277

[134] Greenberg MI, Waksman J, Curtis J. Silicosis: a review. Dis Mon. 2007;53(8):394-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disamonth.2007.09.020

[135] Carbone M, Yang H. Molecular pathways: targeting mechanisms of asbestos and erionite carcinogenesis in mesothelioma. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(3):598-604. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-2259

[136] Stayner L, Welch LS, Lemen R. The worldwide pandemic of asbestos-related diseases. Annu Rev Public Health. 2013;34:205-216. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031811-124704

[137] Bureau of Labor Statistics. Census of fatal occupational injuries summary, 2020. US Department of Labor; 2021.

[138] National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Hierarchy of controls. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Updated 2015. Accessed November 2024.

[139] Murray CJ, Ezzati M, Flaxman AD, et al. GBD 2010: design, definitions, and metrics. Lancet. 2012;380(9859):2063-2066. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61899-6

[140] GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396(10258):1204-1222. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30925-9

[141] GBD 2017 DALYs and HALE Collaborators. Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 359 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018;392(10159):1859-1922. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32335-3

[142] World Health Organization. World malaria report 2022. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022.

[143] Bhatt S, Weiss DJ, Cameron E, et al. The effect of malaria control on Plasmodium falciparum in Africa between 2000 and 2015. Nature. 2015;526(7572):207-211. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15535

[144] RTS,S Clinical Trials Partnership. Efficacy and safety of RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine with or without a booster dose in infants and children in Africa: final results of a phase 3, individually randomised, controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;386(9988):31-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60721-8

[145] World Health Organization. Global tuberculosis report 2022. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022.

[146] Getahun H, Gunneberg C, Granich R, Nunn P. HIV infection-associated tuberculosis: the epidemiology and the response. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;50 Suppl 3:S201-S207. https://doi.org/10.1086/651492

[147] Dheda K, Gumbo T, Maartens G, et al. The epidemiology, pathogenesis, transmission, diagnosis, and management of multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant, and incurable tuberculosis. Lancet Respir Med. 2017;5(4):291-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(17)30079-6

[148] UNAIDS. Global HIV & AIDS statistics – Fact sheet. Updated 2023. Accessed November 2024.

[149] Cohen MS, Chen YQ, McCauley M, et al. Antiretroviral therapy for the prevention of HIV-1 transmission. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(9):830-839. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1600693

[150] Grant RM, Lama JR, Anderson PL, et al. Preexposure chemoprophylaxis for HIV prevention in men who have sex with men. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(27):2587-2599. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1011205

[151] UNAIDS. UNAIDS data 2021. Geneva: Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS; 2021.

[152] World Health Organization. Trends in maternal mortality 2000 to 2020: estimates by WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, World Bank Group and UNDESA/Population Division. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2023.

[153] Say L, Chou D, Gemmill A, et al. Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2(6):e323-e333. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(14)70227-X

[154] Campbell OM, Graham WJ; Lancet Maternal Survival Series steering group. Strategies for reducing maternal mortality: getting on with what works. Lancet. 2006;368(9543):1284-1299. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69381-1

[155] UNICEF. Levels & Trends in Child Mortality: Report 2021. New York: United Nations Children’s Fund; 2021.

[156] Liu L, Oza S, Hogan D, et al. Global, regional, and national causes of under-5 mortality in 2000-15: an updated systematic analysis with implications for the Sustainable Development Goals. Lancet. 2016;388(10063):3027-3035. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31593-8

[157] Jones G, Steketee RW, Black RE, Bhutta ZA, Morris SS; Bellagio Child Survival Study Group. How many child deaths can we prevent this year? Lancet. 2003;362(9377):65-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13811-1

[158] World Health Organization. Everybody’s business: strengthening health systems to improve health outcomes: WHO’s framework for action. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2007.

[159] Kruk ME, Gage AD, Arsenault C, et al. High-quality health systems in the Sustainable Development Goals era: time for a revolution. Lancet Glob Health. 2018;6(11):e1196-e1252. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30386-3

[160] Olaniran A, Smith H, Unkels R, Bar-Zeev S, van den Broek N. Who is a community health worker? – a systematic review of definitions. Glob Health Action. 2017;10(1):1272223. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2017.1272223