Rethinking the COVID-19 Pandemic: Back to Public Health.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted vast differences across countries in their responses to the emergency and their capacities to implement public health measures that could slow the progression of the disease. As public health systems are the first line of defense during pandemics, it has become clear that sustained investment in strengthening public health infrastructure is a major need in all countries, irrespective of income levels. Drawing on the successful experiences of Switzerland, Georgia, and New Zealand in dealing with COVID-19, we suggest prioritizing core public health capacities with links to the International Health Regulations, improving international cooperation, coordination, and multisectoral action, addressing health inequities by targeting vulnerable groups, and enhancing health literacy, including through sophisticated and sustained communication campaigns to build resilience.

Mobilising society to implement solutions for non-communicable diseases.

A BMJ series helps map the way towards better health and wellbeing for all

Application of a system dynamics model to inform investment in smoking cessation services in New Zealand.

Objectives: We estimated the long-term effects of smoking cessation interventions to inform government decision-making regarding investment in tobacco control.

Methods: We extracted data from the 2006 New Zealand Tobacco Use Survey and other sources and developed a system dynamics model with the iThink computer simulation package. The model derived estimates of population cessation rates from smoking behaviors and applied these over a 50-year period, from 2001 to 2051, under business-as-usual and enhanced cessation intervention scenarios.

Sociodemographic characteristics of New Zealand adult smokers, ex-smokers, and non-smokers: results from the 2006 Census.

Aim: To analyse adult smoking rates in New Zealand using 2006 Census data

Methods: Data from the 2006 Census of Population and Dwellings were analysed for smoking status against various demographic variables. Data were compared against 1996 Census data to identify changes in smoking prevalence. Age standardised rates were calculated for gender and ethnicity using the WHO Population Standard.

Prospects for population colorectal cancer screening in New Zealand.

Aim: In 2005 the National Screening Unit of the Ministry of Health appointed a Colorectal Screening Advisory Group to provide independent strategic advice and recommendations on population screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) in New Zealand.

Method: Evidence-based review of relevant literature and assessment of CRC screening using the New Zealand Criteria to Assess Screening Programmes.

Results: Guaiac faecal occult blood test (FOBTg), immunochemical FOBT (FOBTi), flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and CT colonography were considered.

What is the most appropriate breast-cancer screening interval for women aged 45 to 49 years in New Zealand?

Aim: To review the international evidence on the benefits and harms of different screening intervals for women aged 45 to 49 years, and to inform the development of a national policy.

Methods: A systematic search and review of the literature, up to March 2005.

Results: There is no robust trial evidence on which to base a decision on the most appropriate breast-cancer screening interval for women aged 45 to 49 years, and it is unlikely that definitive trial evidence will ever emerge.

Breast cancer screening for women aged 40 to 49 years--what does the evidence mean for New Zealand?

Aim: To review the evidence on the benefits, harms and costs of breast cancer screening for women aged 40 to 49 years in New Zealand.

Methods: A review of the two most recently published meta-analyses of breast cancer screening, combined with a web-based literature search and review.

Results: The meta-analyses demonstrated that mammography reduces breast cancer mortality among women aged 40 to 74 years.

Quality improvement perspective and healthcare funding decisions.

Efforts to apply explicit prioritisation processes to healthcare funding decisions have had mixed results in New Zealand. But a quality improvement approach has advantages over existing prioritisation approaches