Several peer-reviewed papers and reviews have examined the relationship between exposure to air pollution and COVID-19 spread and severity. However, many of the existing reviews on this topic do not extensively present the statistical challenges associated with this field, do not provide comprehensive guidelines for future researchers, and review only the results of a relatively small number of papers. We reviewed 139 papers, 127 of which reported a statistically significant positive association between air pollution and adverse COVID-19 health outcomes. Here, we summarize the evidence, describe the statistical challenges, and make recommendations for future research. To summarize the 139 papers with data from geographical locations around the world, we also present anopen-source data visualization tool that summarizes these studies and allows the research community to contribute evidence as new research papers are published.

Gender is an important determinant of health, but explicit attention to gender is often missing in health promotion. We build on Pederson and colleagues’ gender-transformative framework for health promotion to propose four guiding principles for gender-transformative health promotion. First, health promotion must address gender norms directly if it is to improve health outcomes. Second, it should move beyond individual change to engage explicitly with structural and social determinants of health. Third, it should address underlying gender-related determinants in order to influence health outcomes. And fourth, it requires complexity-informed design, implementation, and evaluation. We provide background on key concepts that are essential for designing, implementing, and evaluating gender-transformative health promotion: gender norms, socioecological approaches, and the gender system. We give examples of the four principles in practice, using the case of postnatal mental health promotion in Australia and sexuality education in Mexico. These four principles can be applied to health promotion efforts across contexts and outcomes to address the harmful gender norms that contribute to poor health as a part of broader efforts to improve health and well-being.

Urban climate policy offers a significant opportunity to promote improved public health. The evidence around climate and health cobenefits is growing but has yet to translate into widespread integrated policies. This article presents two systematic reviews: first, looking at quantified cobenefits of urban climate policies, where transportation, land use, and buildings emerge as the most studied sectors; and second, looking at review papers exploring the barriers and enablers for integrating these health cobenefits into urban policies. The latter reveals wide agreement concerning the need to improve the evidence base for cobenefits and consensus about the need for greater political will and leadership on this issue. Systems thinking may offer a way forward to help embrace complexity and integrate health cobenefits into decision making. Knowledge coproduction to bring stakeholders together and advance policy-relevant research for urban health will also be required. Action is needed to bring these two important policy agendas together.

The impacts of climate change, such as sea-level rise and extreme weather events, are expected to increase and alter human migration and mobility. Climate-related mobility is not inherently a crisis; it can provide a pathway for adaptation to climate change. However, a growing body of research identifies health risks and some opportunities associated with climate-related mobility. This review examines recent research (published since 2018) on the climate change–mobility–health nexus; this research focuses largely on in-country mobility in Asia, Africa, and Pacific Island countries. It considers the links between human mobility and anthropogenic climate change and documents the findings of empirical research that addresses the health consequences of displacement, planned relocation, migration, and migration into sites of climate risk. The findings highlight the need for climate-sensitive and migrant-inclusive health care in a heating world.

Financial resources are known to affect health outcomes. Many types of social policies and programs, including social assistance and social insurance, have been implemented around the world to increase financial resources. We refer to these as cash transfers. In this article, we discuss theory and evidence on whether, how, for whom, and to what extent purposeful cash transfers improve health. Evidence suggests that cash transfers produce positive health effects, but there are many complexities and variations in the outcomes. Continuing research and policy innovation—for example, universal basic income and universal Child Development Accounts—are likely to be productive.

Many low-income and minority children in the United States and globally are at risk of poor educational trajectories and, consequently, diminished life courses, because their households and neighborhoods lack resources to adequately support learning and development prior to formal schooling. This review summarizes evidence on center-based early childhood education (ECE) for three- and four-year-olds as a means of assuring school readiness in cognitive and socioemotional skills. While the details of ECE programs merit further research, it is clear that ECE can benefit children, especially those most disadvantaged, with additional societal benefits and positive long-run economic returns. Universal ECE is not a cure-all, and its success requires ongoing alignment with subsequent education and attention to child household and community conditions. Because resource deprivation is concentrated in low-income and minority communities, publicly funded universal ECE can also be a powerful instrument for the promotion of social equity.

Taking stock of environmental justice (EJ) is daunting. It is at once a scholarly field, an ongoing social movement, and an administrative imperative adopted by government agencies and incorporated into legislation. Moreover, within academia, it is multidisciplinary and multimethodological, comprising scholars who do not always speak to one another. Any review of EJ is thus necessarily restrictive.This article explores several facets of EJ activism. One is its coalitional and “inside-outside” orientation. EJ activists are constantly forming alliances with other stakeholders, but these coalitions do not flout the importance of engaging with formal institutions. The review next turns to one set of such institutions—the courts and regulatory agencies—to see how well EJ claims have fared there. I then survey scientific findings that have been influenced by EJ. The review concludes with future directions for activists and scholars to consider: the changing nature of EJ coalitions, fragmentation within EJ and with other fields, the historical roots of environmental injustice, and opportunities for stronger infusion of the EJ lens.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention define community engagement as “the process of working collaboratively with and through groups of people” in order to improve their health and well-being. Central to the field of public health, community engagement should also be at the core of the work of schools and programs of public health. This article reviews best practices and emerging innovations in community engagement for education, for research, and for practice, including critical service-learning, community-based participatory research, and collective impact. Leadership, infrastructure, and culture are key institutional facilitators of successful academic efforts. Major challenges to overcome include mistrust by community members, imbalance of power, and unequal sharing of credit. Success in this work will advance equity and improve health in communities all around the world.

Emerging evidence supports a link between environmental factors—including air pollution and chemical exposures, climate, and the built environment—and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) susceptibility and severity. Climate, air pollution, and the built environment have long been recognized to influence viral respiratory infections, and studies have established similar associations with COVID-19 outcomes. More limited evidence links chemical exposures to COVID-19. Environmental factors were found to influence COVID-19 through four major interlinking mechanisms: increased risk of preexisting conditions associated with disease severity; immune system impairment; viral survival and transport; and behaviors that increase viral exposure. Both data and methodologic issues complicate the investigation of these relationships, including reliance on coarse COVID-19 surveillance data; gaps in mechanistic studies; and the predominance of ecological designs. We evaluate the strength of evidence for environment–COVID-19 relationships and discuss environmental actions that might simultaneously address the COVID-19 pandemic, environmental determinants of health, and health disparities.

Patient-reported outcomes are recognized as essential for the evaluation of medical and public health interventions. Over the last 50 years, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) research has grown exponentially from 0 to more than 17,000 papers published annually. We provide an overview of generic HRQoL measures used widely in epidemiological studies, health services research, population studies, and randomized clinical trials [e.g., Medical Outcomes Study SF-36 and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®)-29]. In addition, we review methods used for economic analysis and calculation of the quality-adjusted life year (QALY). These include the EQ-5D, the Health Utilities Index (HUI), the self-administered Quality of Well-being Scale (QWB-SA), and the Health and Activities Limitation Index (HALex). Furthermore, we consider hybrid measures such as the SF-6D and the PROMIS-Preference (PROPr). The plethora of HRQoL measures has impeded cumulative science because incomparable measures have been used in different studies. Linking among different measures and consensus on standard HRQoL measurement should now be prioritized. In addition, enabling widespread access to common measures is necessary to accelerate future progress.

Transgender (trans) communities in the USA and globally have long organized for health and social equity but have only recently gained increased visibility within public health. In this review, we synthesize evidence demonstrating that trans adults in the USA are affected by disparities in physical and mental health and in access to health care, relative to cisgender (nontrans) persons. We draw on theory and data to situate these disparities in their social contexts, explicating the roles of gender affirmation, multilevel and intersectional stigmas, and public policies in reproducing or ameliorating trans health disparities. Until recently, trans health disparities were largely made invisible by exclusionary data collection practices. We highlight the importance of, and methodological considerations for, collecting inclusive sex and gender data. Moving forward, we recommend routine collection of gender identity data, an emphasis on intervention research to achieve trans health equity, public policy advocacy, and investment in supporting gender-diverse public health leadership.

The concepts of health misinformation and health disparities have been prominent in public health literature in recent years, in part because of the threat that each notion poses to public health. How exactly are misinformation proliferation and health disparities related, however? What roles might misinformation play in explaining the health disparities that we have documented in the United States and elsewhere? How might we mitigate the effects of misinformation exposure among people facing relatively poor health outcomes? In this review, we address such questions by first defining health disparities and misinformation as concepts and then considering how misinformation exposure might theoretically affect health decision-making and account for disparate health behavior and health outcomes. We alsoassess the potential for misinformation-focused interventions to address health disparities based on available literature and call for future research to address gaps in our current evidence base.

Public health surveillance is defined as the ongoing, systematic collection, analysis, and interpretation of health data and is closely integrated with the timely dissemination of information that the public needs to know and upon which the public should act. Public health surveillance is central to modern public health practice by contributing data and information usually through a national notifiable disease reporting system (NNDRS). Although early identification and prediction of future disease trends may be technically feasible, more work is needed to improve accuracy so that policy makers can use these predictions to guide prevention and control efforts. In this article, we review the advantages and limitations of the current NNDRS in most countries, discuss some lessons learned about prevention and control from the first wave of COVID-19, and describe some technological innovations in public health surveillance, including geographic information systems (GIS), spatial modeling, artificial intelligence, information technology, data science, and the digital twin method. We conclude that the technology-driven innovative public health surveillance systems are expected to further improve the timeliness, completeness, and accuracy of case reporting during outbreaks and also enhance feedback and transparency, whereby all stakeholders should receive actionable information on control and be able to limit disease risk earlier than ever before.

Health behaviors are inextricably linked to health and well-being, yet issues such as physical inactivity and insufficient sleep remain significant global public health problems. Mobile technology—and the unprecedented scope and quantity of data it generates—has a promising but largely untapped potential to promote health behaviors at the individual and population levels. This perspective article provides multidisciplinary recommendations on the design and use of mobile technology, and the concomitant wealth of data, to promote behaviors that support overall health. Using physical activity as anexemplar health behavior, we review emerging strategies for health behavior change interventions. We describe progress on personalizing interventions to an individual and their social, cultural, and built environments, as well as on evaluating relationships between mobile technology data and health to establish evidence-based guidelines. In reviewing these strategies and highlighting directions for future research, we advance the use of theory-based, personalized, and human-centered approaches in promoting health behaviors.

In many cases, implementation approaches (composed of one or more strategies) may need to change over time to work optimally. We use a literature review to inform a mechanistic analysis of such on-the-go adaptations. We suggest that such adaptations of implementation strategies consist of three necessary steps. The first component is the initial effect of the implementation approach on intended implementation, service delivery, or clinical outcomes. Second, these initial effects must in turn be used to modify, alter, intensify, or otherwise change the implementation approach. Third, the modified approach itself has effects. Conceiving of adaptation as all three steps implies that a full understanding of adaptation involves ( a) a sense of initial effects, ( b) conceptualizing and documenting content and rationale for changes in approach (e.g., alteration, intensification), and ( c) the effects of the changed approach (including how the latter effects depend on initial effects). Conceptualizing these steps can help researchers ask questions about adaptation (e.g., thresholds for change, dosing, potentiation, sequencing) to advance our understanding of implementation strategies.

Heat is a dangerous hazard that causes acute heat illness, chronic disease exacerbations, adverse pregnancy outcomes, and a range of injuries. Risks are highest during extreme heat events (EHEs), which challenge the capacity of health systems and other critical infrastructure. EHEs are becoming more frequent and severe, and climate change is driving an increasing proportion of heat-related mortality, necessitating more investment in health protection. Climate-resilient health systems are better positioned for EHEs, and EHE preparedness is a form of disaster risk reduction. Preparedness activities commonly take the form of heat action plans (HAPs), with many examples at various administrative scales. HAP activities can be divided into primary prevention, most important in the pre-event phase; secondary prevention, key to risk reduction early in an EHE;and tertiary prevention, important later in the event phase. After-action reports and other postevent evaluation activities are central to adaptive management of this climate-sensitive hazard.

Unhealthy levels of air pollution are breathed by billions of people worldwide, and air pollution is the leading environmental cause of death and disability globally. Efforts to reduce air pollution at its many sources have had limited success, and in many areas of the world, poor air quality continues to worsen. Personal interventions to reduce exposure to air pollution include avoiding sources, staying indoors, filtering indoor air, using face masks, and limiting physical activity when and where air pollution levels are elevated. The effectiveness of these interventions varies widely with circumstances and conditions of use. Compared with upstream reduction or control of emissions, personal interventions place burdens and risk of adverse unintended consequences on individuals. We review evidence regarding the balance of benefits and potential harms of personal interventions for reducing exposure to outdoor air pollution, which merit careful consideration before making public health recommendations with regard to who should use personal interventions and where, when, and how they should be used.

Advancing the science of intervention scale-up is essential to increasing the impact of effective interventions at the regional and national levels. In contrast with work in high-income countries (HICs), where scale-up research has been limited, researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have conducted numerous studies on the regional and national scale-up of interventions. In this article, we review the state of the science on intervention scale-up in both HICs and LMICs. We provide an introduction to the elements of scale-up followed by a description of the scale-up process, with an illustrative case study from our own research. We then present findings from a scoping review comparing scale-up studies in LMIC and HIC settings. We conclude with lessons learned and recommendations for improving scale-up research.

From education to working conditions, from income to discrimination, social determinants of health (SDH) shape the majority of health outcomes. Governments are often best positioned to address the major SDH on a population-wide basis. In 2015, governments around the world committed to improving all core SDH when all countries agreed to a set of goals that would improve education, work, income, and equal opportunity, among other areas, in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Using data from the WORLD Policy Analysis Center, this article highlights how quantitative policy measures can be used to hold governments accountable for their commitments to the SDGs and thus to improve the SDH. Three areas are examined in detail to illustrate this approach to monitoring policy change: ensuring an adequate income, enhancing equal opportunities at work by prohibiting discrimination and sexual harassment, and enabling children and youth to complete their education.

The shared challenges posed by the production and distribution of health-harming products have led to growing recognition of the need for policy learning and transfer across problems, populations, and social contexts. The commercial determinants of health (CDoH) can serve as a unifying concept to describe the population health consequences arising from for-profit actors and activities, along with the social structures that sustain them. Strategies to mitigate harms from CDoH have focused on behavioral change, regulation, fiscal policies, consumer and citizen activism, and litigation. While there is evidence of effective measures for each strategy, approaches that combine strategies are generally more impactful. Filling gaps in evidence can inform ways of adapting these strategies to specific populations and social contexts. Overall, CDoH are addressed most effectively not through siloed efforts to reduce consumption of health-harming products, but instead as a set of integrated strategies to reduce exposures to health-harming commercial actors and activities.