Write a concise summary of the key points of your research: research topic, objectives (if any), key findings/results, analysis, and major conclusions.? Include 5-7 key
o Page 1: Professional APA style Title Page with running heads.
o Page 2: APA style abstract (must be within 150-250 words). Write a concise summary of the key points of your research: research topic, objectives (if any), key findings/results, analysis, and major conclusions.
§ Include 5-7 keywords below abstract
o Pages 3 to 5: Write your condensed research on the selected topic. Keep it between 3 and 4 pages double-spaced of text. Visuals must be added and does not count towards your page limit
o Page End: APA style References
Written Assignments:
1. Assignment Health Indicators: Choose one nation (already selected for you in bold) from each of the *FOUR* income categories:
1. high-income economies (UNITED STATES)
2. upper middle-income economies (MEXICO)
3. lower middle-income economies (UKRAINE)
4. low-income economies (MADAGASCAR).
2. You need to identify at least *THREE*(already selected for you in bold) health indicators (Infant Mortality Rates, Total Fertility Rate, New Cases of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases) by utilizing your assigned reading materials. Write an analysis of your data that assesses population needs, assets and capacities and their relation to health indicators and how they affect the health of communities within their respective country. See syllabus/course outline for specific guidelines for this paper and refer to the grading rubric attached to the assignment.
· Page Limit:
· Page 1: Professional APA style Title Page with running heads .
· Page 2: APA style abstract (must be within 150-250 words). Write a concise summary of the key points of your research: research topic, objectives (if any), key findings/results, analysis, and major conclusions.
· Include 5-7 keywords below abstract
· Pages 3 to 5: Write your condensed research on the selected topic. Keep it between 3 and 4 pages double-spaced of text. Visuals must be added and does not count towards your page limit
· Page End: APA style References
· Please use information and visuals (photos/images/maps, tables and figures/diagrams) made by you and/or from online sources, government websites, international organization’s websites, as well as, peer-reviewed journals. Use a minimum of 3 visuals in your report. Your visuals are a very critical piece of your writing and must flow well and must be properly called from the text, and numbered in the correct order (sequentially). Try to incorporate some variety in your visuals (one figure, one table, one map, one photo, etc.)
All in-text citations must be APA style. Every statistic and major point must have supporting sources. Do not overuse a single source within the same paragraph, add variety by using multiple sources in the same paragraph. Make sure to order alphabetically your reference section. Always use Agency name, not the title as your in-text citation, with Year.
Health Indicators Rubric
Outstanding Achievement 90-100% |
Commendable Achievement 80-90% |
Marginal Achievement 70-80% |
Unsatisfactory 60-70% |
Failing 0% |
|
Identified Nations in Correct Income Brackets 10% |
Four nations are identified consistent with the four income-categories listed in most recent World Bank website. |
Three nations are identified consistent with the four income-categories listed in most recent World Bank website. |
Two nations are identified consistent with the four income-categories listed in most recent World Bank website. |
Nations are identified however, the income categories are incorrect. |
Missing |
Identified & Defined Five Health Indicators 30% |
Health indicators are correctly identified and defined using the WHO website. |
Health indicators are identified using the WHO website but not defined. |
Fewer than five health indicators are identified & defined. |
Fewer than three health indicators are identified & defined. |
Missing |
Analysis of data 30% |
Statistics are correctly interpreted and clearly presented. |
Statistics are correctly interpreted but not clearly presented. |
Statistics are neither clearly presented nor interpreted correctly. |
Incorrect statistics are given. |
Missing |
Assessment 10% |
Student assesses population needs, assets and capacities that affect communities’ health. Student makes original observations regarding trends, associations, and consistencies among independent measures. |
Student assesses most population needs, assets and capacities that affect communities’ health. Student makes some observations regarding trends, associations, and consistencies among independent measures. |
Student assesses some population needs, assets and capacities that affect communities’ health. Student makes some observations regarding trends, associations, and consistencies among dependent measures. |
Student assesses few population needs, assets and capacities that affect communities’ health. Student incorrectly identifies a trend, association or consistency. |
Missing |
Writing Style 15% |
All sentences are well-constructed with varied structure. All sentences sound natural and are easy-on-the-ear when read aloud. Each sentence is clear and has an obvious emphasis. Writer makes no errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. Writer makes no errors in capitalization or punctuation, so the paper is exceptionally easy to read. Writer uses vivid words and phrases that linger or draw pictures in the reader's mind, and the choice and placement of the words seem accurate, natural and not forced. |
Almost all sentences sound natural and are easy-on-the-ear when read aloud, but 1 or 2 are stiff and awkward or difficult to understand. Writer makes few errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. Writer makes 1 or 2 errors in capitalization or punctuation, but the paper is still easy to read. Writer uses vivid words and phrases that linger or draw pictures in the reader's mind, but occasionally the words are used inaccurately or seem overdone. |
Most sentences are well-constructed but have a similar structure. Most sentences sound natural and are easy-on-the-ear when read aloud, but several are stiff and awkward or are difficult to understand. Writer makes some errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. Writer makes a few errors in capitalization and/or punctuation that catch the reader's attention and interrupt the flow. Writer uses words that communicate clearly, but the writing lacks variety, punch or flair. |
Sentences lack structure and appear incomplete or rambling. The sentences are difficult to read aloud because they sound awkward, are distractingly repetitive, or are difficult to understand. Writer makes many errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. Writer makes several errors in capitalization and/or punctuation that catch the reader's attention and greatly interrupt the flow. Writer uses a limited vocabulary that does not communicate strongly or capture the reader's interest. Jargon or cliches may be present and detract from the meaning. |
Errors in writing throughout. |
Referencing 5% |
Citations and references are in proper APA format. Ample sources are cited. All claims are supported with a professional reference. |
Citations and references are in proper APA format. Ample sources are cited. Some claims leave the reader looking for a reference. |
Citations and references are in proper APA format. Ample sources are cited. Many claims leave the reader looking for a reference. |
Citations and references are limited, missing or incorrect. |
Citations and references are missing or incorrect. |
,
Viewpoint
www.thelancet.com Vol 373 June 6, 2009 1993
Towards a common defi nition of global health Jeff rey P Koplan, T Christopher Bond, Michael H Merson, K Srinath Reddy, Mario Henry Rodriguez, Nelson K Sewankambo, Judith N Wasserheit, for the Consortium of Universities for Global Health Executive Board*
Global health is fashionable. It provokes a great deal of media, student, and faculty interest, has driven the establishment or restructuring of several academic programmes, is supported by governments as a crucial component of foreign policy,1 and has become a major philanthropic target. Global health is derived from public health and international health, which, in turn, evolved from hygiene and tropical medicine. However, although frequently referenced, global health is rarely defi ned. When it is, the defi nition varies greatly and is often little more than a rephrasing of a common defi nition of public health or a politically correct updating of international health. Therefore, how should global health be defi ned?
Global health can be thought of as a notion (the current state of global health), an objective (a world of healthy people, a condition of global health), or a mix of scholarship, research, and practice (with many questions, issues, skills, and competencies). The need for a commonly used and accepted defi nition extends beyond semantics. Without an established defi nition, a shorthand term such as global health might obscure important diff erences in philosophy, strategies, and priorities for action between physicians, researchers, funders, the media, and the general public. Perhaps most importantly, if we do not clearly defi ne what we mean by global health, we cannot possibly reach agreement about what we are trying to achieve, the approaches we must take, the skills that are needed, and the ways that we should use resources. In this Viewpoint, we present the reasoning behind the defi nition of global health, as agreed by a panel of multidisciplinary and international colleagues.
Public health in the modern sense emerged in the mid- 19th century in several countries (England, continental Europe, and the USA) as part of both social reform movements and the growth of biological and medical knowledge (especially causation and management of infectious disease).2 Farr, Chadwick, Virchow, Koch, Pasteur, and Shattuck helped to establish the discipline on the basis of four factors: (1) decision making based on data and evidence (vital statistics, surveillance and outbreak investigations, laboratory science); (2) a focus on populations rather than individuals; (3) a goal of social justice and equity; and (4) an emphasis on prevention rather than curative care. All these elements are embedded in most defi nitions of public health.
The defi nition of public health that has perhaps best stood the test of time is that suggested by Winslow almost 90 years ago:3
“Public health is the science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life and promoting physical health and effi cacy through organized community eff orts for the sanitation of the environment, the control of
Lancet 2009; 373: 1993–95
Published Online June 2, 2008 DOI:10.1016/S0140- 6736(09)60332-9
See Editorial page 1919
*Members listed at end of paper
Emory Global Health Institute (Prof J P Koplan MD), and Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health (T C Bond PhD), Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA; Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA (Prof M H Merson MD); Public Health Foundation of India, Delhi, India (Prof K S Reddy MD); Instituto Nacional de Salud Publica, Cuernavaca, Mexico (Prof M H Rodriguez MD); School of Medicine, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda (Prof N K Sewankambo FRCP); and Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA (Prof J N Wasserheit MD)
Correspondence to: Prof Jeff rey P Koplan, Robert W Woodruff Health Sciences Center, Emory University, 1440 Clifton Road Suite 410, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA [email protected]
communicable infections, the education of the individual in personal hygiene, the organization of medical and nursing services for the early diagnosis and preventive treatment of disease, and the development of social machinery which will ensure every individual in the community a standard of living adequate for the maintenance of health; so organizing these benefi ts in such a fashion as to enable every citizen to realize his birthright and longevity.”
The US Institute of Medicine (IOM), in its 1988 Future of public health report,4 described public health in terms of its mission, substance, and organisational framework, which, in turn, address prevention, a community approach, health as a public good, and the contributions of various partners. The IOM report defi ned the mission of public health as “fulfi lling society’s interest in assuring conditions in which people can be healthy”.4 In the Dictionary of epidemiology (2001), Last5 defi ned public health as “one of the eff orts to protect, promote and restore the people’s health. It is the combination of sciences, skills and beliefs that is directed to the maintenance and improvement of the health of all the people through collective or social actions”.
International health has a more straightforward history. For decades, it was the term used for health work abroad, with a geographic focus on developing countries and often with a content of infectious and tropical diseases, water and sanitation, malnutrition, and maternal and child health.6 Many academic departments and organisations still use this term, but include a broader range of subjects such as chronic diseases, injuries, and health systems. The Global Health Education Consortium defi nes international health as a subspecialty that “relates more to health practices, policies and systems…and stresses more the diff erences between countries than their commonalities”.7 Other research groups defi ne international health as limited exclusively to the diseases of the developing world.8 But many fi nd international health a perfectly usable term and have adapted it to coincide with the philosophy and content of today’s globalised health practice.7,8 International health is defi ned by Merson, Black, and Mills9 as “the application of the principles of public health to problems and challenges that aff ect low and middle-income countries and to the complex array of global and local forces that infl uence them”.
Global health has areas of overlap with the more established disciplines of public health and international health (table). All three entities share the following characteristics: priority on a population-based and preventive focus; concentration on poorer, vulnerable, and underserved populations; multidisciplinary and
Viewpoint
1994 www.thelancet.com Vol 373 June 6, 2009
interdisciplinary approaches; emphasis on health as a public good and the importance of systems and structures; and the participation of several stakeholders. In view of these commonalities, we are left with key questions that need to be resolved to arrive at a useful and distinctive defi nition for global health. We address some of these questions here.
What is global? Must a health crisis cross national borders to be deemed a global health issue? We should not restrict global health to health-related issues that literally cross international borders. Rather, in this context, global refers to any health issue that concerns many countries or is aff ected by transnational determinants, such as climate change or urbanisation, or solutions, such as polio eradication. Epidemic infectious diseases such as dengue, infl uenza A (H5N1), and HIV infection are clearly global. But global health should also address tobacco control, micronutrient defi ciencies, obesity, injury prevention, migrant-worker health, and migration of health workers. The global in global health refers to the scope of problems, not their location. Thus—like public health but unlike international health—global health can focus on domestic health disparities as well as cross-border issues. Global health also incorporates the training and distribution of the health-care workforce in a manner that goes beyond the capacity-building interest of public health.
Is global health mainly directed to infectious disease and maternal and child health issues or does it also address issues such as chronic diseases, injuries, mental health, and the environment? Infectious diseases and maternal and child health have dominated international health and continue to receive the most attention and interest in global health. However, global health has to embrace the full breadth of important health threats. This broad set of priorities might mean accepting that, for many countries, the epidemiological transition is a continuing process. Simultaneous eff ort needs to be expended on undernutrition and overnutrition, HIV/ AIDS and tobacco, malaria and mental health, tuberculosis and deaths due to motor vehicle accidents. Infectious agents are communicable and so are parts of the western lifestyle (ie, dietary changes, lack of physical
activity, reliance on automobile transport, smoking, stress, urbanisation). Burden of illness should be used as a criterion for global-health priority setting.
How does global health relate to globalisation? The spread of health risks and diseases across the world, often linked with trade or attempted conquest, is not new to public health or international health. Plague spread across Europe and Asia in the middle ages; quarantine was developed in 14th-century Venice; smallpox and measles were introduced to the New World by European invaders in the 16th century; the same explorers took tobacco from the Americas to Europe and beyond, leading to premature disease and death; and opium was sold to China in the 18th and 19th centuries as a product of trade and subjugation by imperial western powers. Never- theless, the rapid increase in speed of travel and communication, as well as the economic interdependency of all nations, has led to a new level and speed of global interconnectedness or globalisation, which is a force in shaping the health of populations around the world.
Must global health operate only within a context of a goal of social/economic equity? The quest for equity is a fundamental philosophical value for public health. The promotion of social and economic equity, and reduction of health disparities has been a key theme in domestic public health, international health, and global health. Up to now, most health initiatives in countries without suffi cient resources to deal with their own health problems have come about through the assistance of wealthier countries, organisations, and foundations. Although this assistance is understandable, it does not help us to distinguish global health as a specialty of study and practice.
Global health has come to encompass more complex transactions between societies. Such societies recognise that the developed world does not have a monopoly on good ideas and search across cultures for better approaches to the prevention and treatment of common diseases, healthy environments, and more effi cient food production and distribution. The preference for use of the term global health where international health might previously have been used runs parallel to a shift in philosophy and attitude that emphasises the mutuality of
Global health International health Public health
Geographical reach Focuses on issues that directly or indirectly aff ect health but that can transcend national boundaries
Focuses on health issues of countries other than one’s own, especially those of low-income and middle-income
Focuses on issues that aff ect the health of the population of a particular community or country
Level of cooperation Development and implementation of solutions often requires global cooperation
Development and implementation of solutions usually requires binational cooperation
Development and implementation of solutions does not usually require global cooperation
Individuals or populations
Embraces both prevention in populations and clinical care of individuals
Embraces both prevention in populations and clinical care of individuals
Mainly focused on prevention programmes for populations
Access to health Health equity among nations and for all people is a major objective
Seeks to help people of other nations Health equity within a nation or community is a major objective
Range of disciplines Highly interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary within and beyond health sciences
Embraces a few disciplines but has not emphasised multidisciplinarity
Encourages multidisciplinary approaches, particularly within health sciences and with social sciences
Table: Comparison of global, international, and public health
Viewpoint
www.thelancet.com Vol 373 June 6, 2009 1995
real partnership, a pooling of experience and knowledge, and a two-way fl ow between developed and developing countries. Global health thus uses the resources, knowledge, and experience of diverse societies to address health challenges throughout the world.
What is the interdisciplinary scope of global health? Professionals from many diverse disciplines wish to contribute to improving global health. Although global health places greater priority on prevention, it also embraces curative, rehabilitative, and other aspects of clinical medicine and the study of basic sciences. But these latter areas are less central to the core elements of public health than are its population-based and preventive orientations. Clearly, many disciplines, such as the social and behavioural sciences, law, economics, history, engineering, biomedical and environmental sciences, and public policy can make great contributions to global health. Thus, global health encompasses prevention, treatment, and care; it is truly an interdisciplinary sphere.
A steady evolution of philosophy, attitude, and practice has led to the increased use of the term global health. Thus, on the basis of this analysis, we off er the following defi nition: global health is an area for study, research, and practice that places a priority on improving health and achieving equity in health for all people worldwide. Global health emphasises transnational health issues, deter- minants, and solutions; involves many disciplines within and beyond the health sciences and promotes inter- disciplinary collaboration; and is a synthesis of population- based prevention with individual-level clinical care.
We call for the adoption of a common defi nition of global health. We will all be best served (and best serve the health of others around the world) if we share a common defi nition of the specialty in which we work and to which we encourage others to lend their eff orts.
Contributors All authors contributed to the writing and editing of the manuscript. The
Consortium of Universities for Global Health (CUGH) Executive Board
developed the defi nition and reviewed and edited the manuscript.
CUGH Executive Board Haile Debas (University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA);
King Holmes (University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA);
Gerald Keusch (Boston University, Boston, MA, USA); Jeff rey Koplan
(Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA); Michael Merson (Duke University, Durham, NC, USA); Thomas Quinn (Johns Hopkins
University, Baltimore, MD, USA); Judith N Wasserheit (University of
Washington, Seattle, WA, USA).
Confl icts of interest We declare that we have no confl icts of interest.
Acknowledgments We thank George Alleyne, Lincoln Chen, William Foege, Andy Haines,
Mohammed Hassar, Venkat Narayan, Sharifa Saif Al-Jabri,
Barry Schoub, and Olive Shisana for their comments and suggestions.
References 1 Institute of Medicine. The US commitment to global health:
recommendations for the new administration. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, Dec 15, 2008. http://www.iom.edu/ CMS/3783/51303/60714.aspx (accessed Feb 19, 2009).
2 Porter R. The greatest benefi t to mankind: a medical history of humanity. New York: W W Norton & Company, 1997.
3 Winslow C. The untilled fi eld of public health. Mod Med 1920; 2: 183–91.
4 Institute of Medicine. The future of public health. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1988.
5 Last J. A dictionary of epidemiology. New York: Oxford, 2001.
6 Brown TM, Cueto M, Fee E. The World Health Organization and the transition from “international” to “global” public health. Am J Public Health 2006; 96: 62–72.
7 Global Health Education Consortium. Global vs international. http://globalhealthedu.org/Pages/GlobalvsInt.aspx (accessed Feb 19, 2009).
8 Brown University International Health Institute. Welcome to the International Health Institute. http://med.brown.edu/ihi/ (accessed Feb 19, 2009).
9 Merson MH, Black RE, Mills AJ. International public health: diseases, programs, systems, and policies, 2nd edn. Sudbury MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2006.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
- Towards a common definition of global health
- Acknowledgments
- References
,
IN THE YEAR 2015, LEADERS FROM 193 COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD
CAME TOGETHER TO FACE THE FUTURE.
And what they saw was daunting. Famines. Drought. Wars. Plagues. Poverty.
Not just in some faraway place, but in their own cities and towns and villages.
They knew things didn’t have to be this way. They knew we had enough
food to feed the world, but that it wasn’t getting shared. They knew there
were medicines for HIV and other diseases, but they cost a lot. They knew
that earthquakes and floods were inevitable, but that the high death
tolls were not.
They also knew that billions of people worldwide shared their hope for a
better future.
So leaders from these countries created a plan called the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs). This set of 17 goals imagines a future just 15 years
off that would be rid of poverty and hunger, and safe from the worst effects of
climate change. It’s an ambitious plan.
But there’s ample evidence that we can succeed. In the past 15 years, the
international community cut extreme poverty in half.
Now we can finish the job.
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is one of the leading
organizations working to fulfil the SDGs by the year 2030. Present in nearly
170 countries and territories, we help nations make the Goals a reality.
We also champion the Goals so that people everywhere know how to
do their part.
UNDP is proud to continue as a leader in this global movement.
Learn about the Sustainable Development Goals. What’s your Goal?
END EXTREME POVERTY IN ALL FORMS BY 2030.
Yes, it’s an ambitious goal—but we believe it can be done. In 2000, the
world committed to halving the number of people living in extreme
poverty by the year 2015 and we met this goal. However, more than
800 million people around the world still live on less than $1.25 a day—
that’s about the equivalent of the entire population of Europe living in
extreme poverty. Now it’s time to build on what we learned and end
poverty altogether.
END HUNGER, ACHIEVE FOOD SECURITY AND IMPROVED NUTRITION AND PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE
In the past 20 years, hunger has dropped by almost half. Many
countries that used to suffer from famine and hunger can now
meet the nutritional needs of their most vulnerable people. It’s an
incredible accomplishment. Now we can go further and end hunger
and malnutrition once and for all. That means doing things such as
promoting sustainable agriculture and supporting small farmers. It’s a tall
order. But for the sake of the nearly 1 out of every 9 people on earth who
go to bed hungry every night, we’ve got to try. Imagine a world where
everyone has access to sufficient and nutritious food all year round.
Together, we can make that a reality by 2030.
ENSURE HEALTHY LIVES AND PROMOTE WELL-BEING FOR ALL AT ALL AGES
We all know how important it is to be in good health. Our health affects
everything from how much we enjoy life to what work we can perform.
That’s why there’s a Goal to make sure everyone has health coverage
and access to safe and effective medicines and vaccines. In the 25
years before the SDGs, we made big strides—preventable child deaths
dropped by more than half, and maternal mortality went down by
almost as much. And yet some other numbers remain tragically high, like
the fact that 6 million children die every year before their fifth birthday,
or that AIDS is the leading cause of death for adolescents in sub-Saharan
Africa. We have the means to turn that around and make good health
more than just a wish.
ENSURE INCLUSIVE AND EQUITABLE QUALITY EDUCATION AND PROMOTE LIFELONG LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL
First, the bad news on education. Poverty, armed conflict and other
emergencies keep many, many kids around the world out of school. In
fact, kids from the poorest households are four times more likely to be
out of school than those of the richest households. Now for some good
news. Since 2000, there has been enormous progress on the goal to
provide primary education to all children worldwide: the total enrolment
rate in developing regions has reached 91%. By measures in any school,
that’s a good grade. Now, let’s get an even better grade for all kids,
and achieve the goal of universal primary and secondary education,
affordable vocational training, access to higher education and more.
We can celebrate the great progress the world has made in becoming
more prosperous and fair. But there’s a shadow to the celebration. In
just about every way, women and girls lag behind. There are still gross
inequalities in work and wages, lots of unpaid “women’s work” such as
child care and domestic work, and discrimination in public decision-
making. But there are grounds for hope. More girls a
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.