Wei sheng yan jiu = Journal of hygiene research · 2005
[Implementation analysis of public functions of 161 centers of disease prevention and control in 7 provinces].
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Su Zhong-Xin, Xie Hong-Bin, Luo Li, Wang Wei-Cheng, Wang Ying, Sun Mei, Ma Ning, Yu Jingjin, Yu Mingzhu, Duan Yong, Gong Xiangguang, Chen Zheng, Wang Hua, Shi Peiwu, Liang Zhankai, Yang Feng, Wang Dunzhi, Yue Jianning, Luo Shi, Hao Mo
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the implementation of public function and items of the centers of disease prevention and control (CDC).
METHODS: 161 centers of disease prevention and control have been investigated by two-stage stratified sampling. The implementation analysis of public function and items of CDC is measured by multiplying average operational proportion and average operational degree.
RESULTS: (1) For investigated centers, the average rate of function implementation is 42.9%, with 56.0% at provincial level and 43.7% at city level, 41.3% for the county level, while 49.3% in east areas, 45.4% in middle areas and 35.3% in west areas. (2) Among all 7 functional items, the implemented rate of disease prevention and control is 54.3%, 65.8% for emergency treatment, 35.0% for epidemic situation report and information management of health relative factors, 31.3% for inspection and control of health risk factors, 39.1% for the laboratory examination and evaluation, 36.4% for health education and health promotion, and 56.7% for technological guidance and application study.
CONCLUSION: The implemented degree of public function of CDC was generally lower, varied with regions and levels. Among 7 public functional items, the emergency treatment function had the highest implementation, with the lowest for the inspection and control of health relative factors.
METHODS: 161 centers of disease prevention and control have been investigated by two-stage stratified sampling. The implementation analysis of public function and items of CDC is measured by multiplying average operational proportion and average operational degree.
RESULTS: (1) For investigated centers, the average rate of function implementation is 42.9%, with 56.0% at provincial level and 43.7% at city level, 41.3% for the county level, while 49.3% in east areas, 45.4% in middle areas and 35.3% in west areas. (2) Among all 7 functional items, the implemented rate of disease prevention and control is 54.3%, 65.8% for emergency treatment, 35.0% for epidemic situation report and information management of health relative factors, 31.3% for inspection and control of health risk factors, 39.1% for the laboratory examination and evaluation, 36.4% for health education and health promotion, and 56.7% for technological guidance and application study.
CONCLUSION: The implemented degree of public function of CDC was generally lower, varied with regions and levels. Among 7 public functional items, the emergency treatment function had the highest implementation, with the lowest for the inspection and control of health relative factors.