Embracing Controversy: A Second Look at CDC Reform Efforts in the Wake of COVID-19.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-11-15 DOI:10.1215/03616878-11672932
Ann C Keller
{"title":"Embracing Controversy: A Second Look at CDC Reform Efforts in the Wake of COVID-19.","authors":"Ann C Keller","doi":"10.1215/03616878-11672932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Addressing criticism that the agency's Covid-19 response was lacking, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has proposed internal agency reforms intended to improve its performance during the next pandemic. They are aimed at improving surveillance and analytic capacity and agency communications. This essay, via a counterfactual analysis of the CDC's proposed reforms, asks how, if completed in advance of Covid-19, they might have changed outcomes in four cases of guidance controversy during the pandemic. CDC planned reforms, though they have merit, are predicated on the ability to come to \"scientific closure\" in a highly charged political environment. To improve outcomes in a future pandemic, the agency should consider how it plans to communicate with the public when recovering from error and when addressing controversy spurred by criticism from credible experts. However, the ability of future presidents to limit CDC performance and communications in the next pandemic and the lack of political consensus around the value of independent public health expertise threaten the agency's reform goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-11672932","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Addressing criticism that the agency's Covid-19 response was lacking, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has proposed internal agency reforms intended to improve its performance during the next pandemic. They are aimed at improving surveillance and analytic capacity and agency communications. This essay, via a counterfactual analysis of the CDC's proposed reforms, asks how, if completed in advance of Covid-19, they might have changed outcomes in four cases of guidance controversy during the pandemic. CDC planned reforms, though they have merit, are predicated on the ability to come to "scientific closure" in a highly charged political environment. To improve outcomes in a future pandemic, the agency should consider how it plans to communicate with the public when recovering from error and when addressing controversy spurred by criticism from credible experts. However, the ability of future presidents to limit CDC performance and communications in the next pandemic and the lack of political consensus around the value of independent public health expertise threaten the agency's reform goals.

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
拥抱争议:在 COVID-19 事件之后重新审视疾病预防控制中心的改革努力》(A Second Look at CDC Reform Efforts in the Wake of COVID-19)。
美国疾病控制和预防中心(CDC)在回应关于该机构对 Covid-19 缺乏反应的批评时,提出了机构内部改革建议,旨在改善其在下一次大流行期间的表现。这些改革旨在提高监测和分析能力以及机构沟通能力。本文通过对疾病预防控制中心提出的改革方案进行反事实分析,探讨如果这些改革在 Covid-19 之前完成,会如何改变大流行期间四个指导争议案例的结果。疾病预防控制中心计划的改革虽然有其优点,但其前提是能够在高度紧张的政治环境中达成 "科学结论"。为了在未来的大流行中改善结果,该机构应考虑在从错误中恢复时,以及在应对可信专家的批评所引发的争议时,计划如何与公众沟通。然而,未来总统限制疾病预防控制中心在下一次大流行中的表现和沟通的能力,以及对独立公共卫生专家的价值缺乏政治共识,都威胁着该机构的改革目标。
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
7.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
46
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: A leading journal in its field, and the primary source of communication across the many disciplines it serves, the Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law focuses on the initiation, formulation, and implementation of health policy and analyzes the relations between government and health—past, present, and future.
期刊最新文献
Explaining Political Differences in Attitudes to Vaccines in France: Partisan Cues, Disenchantment with Politics, and Political Sophistication. Implementing Primary Care Reform in France: Bargaining, Policy Adaptation, and the Maisons de Santé Pluriprofessionnelles. Policy Feedback and the Politics of Childhood Vaccine Mandates: Conflict and Change in California, 2012-2019. Regime Type and Data Manipulation: Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Why Some Nonelderly Adult Medicaid Enrollees Appear Ineligible Based on Their Annual Income.
×
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