'Staying in the lane' of public health? Boundary-work in the roles of state health officials and experts in COVID-19 policymaking.

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Sociology of health & illness Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-17 DOI:10.1111/1467-9566.13751
Katelyn Esmonde, Jeff Jones, Michaela Johns, Brian Hutler, Ruth Faden, Anne Barnhill
{"title":"'Staying in the lane' of public health? Boundary-work in the roles of state health officials and experts in COVID-19 policymaking.","authors":"Katelyn Esmonde, Jeff Jones, Michaela Johns, Brian Hutler, Ruth Faden, Anne Barnhill","doi":"10.1111/1467-9566.13751","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The state-level COVID-19 response in the United States necessitated collaboration between governor' offices, health departments and numerous other departments and outside experts. To gain insight into how health officials and experts contributed to advising on COVID-19 policies, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 individuals with a health specialisation who were involved in COVID-19 policymaking, taking place between February and December 2022. We found two diverging understandings of the role of health officials and experts in COVID-19 policymaking: the role of 'staying in the lane' of public health in terms of the information that they collected, their advocacy for policies and their area of expertise and the role of engaging in the balancing of multiple considerations, such as public health, feasibility and competing objectives (such as the economy) in the crafting of pandemic policy. We draw on the concept of boundary-work to examine how these roles were constructed. We conclude by considering the appropriateness as well as the ethical implications of these two approaches to public health policymaking.</p>","PeriodicalId":21685,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of health & illness","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology of health & illness","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13751","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The state-level COVID-19 response in the United States necessitated collaboration between governor' offices, health departments and numerous other departments and outside experts. To gain insight into how health officials and experts contributed to advising on COVID-19 policies, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 individuals with a health specialisation who were involved in COVID-19 policymaking, taking place between February and December 2022. We found two diverging understandings of the role of health officials and experts in COVID-19 policymaking: the role of 'staying in the lane' of public health in terms of the information that they collected, their advocacy for policies and their area of expertise and the role of engaging in the balancing of multiple considerations, such as public health, feasibility and competing objectives (such as the economy) in the crafting of pandemic policy. We draw on the concept of boundary-work to examine how these roles were constructed. We conclude by considering the appropriateness as well as the ethical implications of these two approaches to public health policymaking.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
坚守公共卫生的 "本位"?州卫生官员和专家在 COVID-19 决策中的角色分工。
美国州一级的 COVID-19 应对措施需要州长办公室、卫生部门和许多其他部门及外部专家之间的合作。为了深入了解卫生官员和专家如何为 COVID-19 政策提供建议,我们在 2022 年 2 月至 12 月期间对 25 位参与 COVID-19 决策的卫生专业人士进行了半结构化访谈。我们发现,对于卫生官员和专家在 COVID-19 政策制定中的角色,存在两种不同的理解:一种是在收集信息、倡导政策和专业领域方面 "坚守 "公共卫生的角色,另一种是在制定大流行病政策时参与平衡公共卫生、可行性和竞争目标(如经济)等多重考虑因素的角色。我们借鉴 "边界工作"(boundary-work)的概念来研究这些角色是如何构建的。最后,我们将考虑这两种公共卫生决策方法的适当性和伦理意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
6.90%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Sociology of Health & Illness is an international journal which publishes sociological articles on all aspects of health, illness, medicine and health care. We welcome empirical and theoretical contributions in this field.
期刊最新文献
Health inequalities and contemporary youth: Young people's accounts of the social determinants of health in an 'austere meritocracy'. Engaging with discursive complexities in mental health accessibility: Implications for acquired brain injury. Genetics, emotion and care: Navigating future reproductive decisions in families of children with rare genetic conditions. Positioning comfort measures in antenatal counselling for periviable infants. Family planning policy and gender in Nigeria: A thematic analysis of the government's health policy perspective.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1