Shaping applied epidemiology workforce training to strengthen emergency response: a global survey of applied epidemiologists, 2019-2020

BACKGROUND

Rapid and effective emergency response to address health security relies on a competent and suitably trained local and international workforce. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted that the health security workforce needs to be well equipped to tackle current and future challenges. In this study, we explored whether training in applied epidemiology was meeting the current needs of the applied epidemiology workforce.

METHOD

We conducted a cross-sectional online survey that was available in English and French. We used purposive and snowballing sampling techniques to identify potential survey respondents. An online social media advertisement campaign was used to disseminate a REDCap survey link between October 2019 and February 2020 through field epidemiology networks. Survey questions included demographic details of participants, along with their technical background, level of formal education, topics studied during epidemiology training, and years of experience as an epidemiologist. We used Pearson Chi-squared (Chi2) to test the difference between categorical variables, and content analysis to evaluate responses to open-ended questions.

RESULTS

In total, 282 people responded to the survey. Participants had a range of formal public health and epidemiology training backgrounds. Respondents applied epidemiology experience spanned almost 30 years, across 64 countries. Overall, 74% (n = 210) were alumni of Field Epidemiology Training Programs (FETP). Basic outbreak and surveillance training was well reported by respondents, however training in specialised techniques related to emergency response, communication, and leadership was less common. FETP graduates reported higher levels of formal training in all survey topics.

CONCLUSION

It is critical for the health security workforce to be well-trained and equipped with skills needed to ensure a rapid and effective response to acute public health events. Leadership, communication, interpersonal skills, and specialist training in emergency response are lacking in current training models. Our study has demonstrated that applied epidemiology workforce training must evolve to remain relevant to current and future public health challenges.

Perspectives on the Future of Epidemiology: A Framework for Training

Over the past century, the field of epidemiology has evolved and adapted to changing public health needs. Challenges include newly emerging public health concerns across broad and diverse content areas, new methods, and vast data sources. We recognize the need to engage and educate the next generation of epidemiologists and prepare them to tackle these issues of the 21st century. In this commentary, we suggest a skeleton framework upon which departments of epidemiology should build their curriculum. We propose domains that include applied epidemiology, biological and social determinants of health, communication, creativity and ability to collaborate and lead, statistical methods, and study design. We believe all students should gain skills across these domains to tackle the challenges posed to us. The aim is to train smart thinkers, not technicians, to embrace challenges and move the expanding field of epidemiology forward.

Training the Twenty-First Century Cancer Epidemiologist

To assess and advance training of twenty-first century cancer epidemiologists, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) sought to obtain a snapshot of the cancer epidemiology training landscape by conducting a survey across academic institutions and cancer centers, focusing on four key training areas driving current cancer epidemiology research ("drivers"): (1) collaboration, (2) novel methods/technologies, (3) multilevel analysis, and (4) knowledge integration. Complementary to the survey, we conducted a portfolio analysis of active NCI-funded training grants. In the present report, we provide our findings from this effort and contribute to the on-going conversation regarding the training of next-generation cancer epidemiologists. Analyses and insights gained from conversations with leaders/educators across 24 academic institutions/cancer centers and the portfolio analysis of training grants echoed contemporaneous conversation that cancer epidemiology training must adapt to meet the needs of the changing research environment. Currently, with the exception of novel methods/technologies, cancer epidemiology trainees receive the majority of their training in collaboration, multilevel approaches, and knowledge integration/translation either informally, ad hoc, or not at all; exposure to these identified drivers varied considerably by institution, mentor, and other external as well as internal factors.

InterPreT cancer survival: A dynamic web interactive prediction cancer survival tool for health-care professionals and cancer epidemiologists

BACKGROUND

There are a variety of ways for quantifying cancer survival with each measure having advantages and disadvantages. Distinguishing these measures and how they should be interpreted has led to confusion among scientists, the media, health care professionals and patients. This motivates the development of tools to facilitate communication and interpretation of these statistics.

METHODS

"InterPreT Cancer Survival" is a newly developed, publicly available, online interactive cancer survival tool targeted towards health-care professionals and epidemiologists (http://interpret.le.ac.uk). It focuses on the correct interpretation of commonly reported cancer survival measures facilitated through the use of dynamic interactive graphics. Statistics presented are based on parameter estimates obtained from flexible parametric relative survival models using large population-based English registry data containing information on survival across 6 cancer sites; Breast, Colon, Rectum, Stomach, Melanoma and Lung.

RESULTS

Through interactivity, the tool improves understanding of various measures and how survival or mortality may vary by age and sex. Routine measures of cancer survival are reported, however, individualised estimates using crude probabilities are advocated, which is more appropriate for patients or health care professionals. The results are presented in various interactive formats facilitating understanding of individual risk and differences between various measures.

CONCLUSIONS

"InterPreT Cancer Survival" is presented as an educational tool which engages the user through interactive features to improve the understanding of commonly reported cancer survival statistics. The tool has received positive feedback from a Cancer Research UK patient sounding board and there are further plans to incorporate more disease characteristics, e.g. stage.