How much digital public health is taught in German public health programs? A qualitative analysis

Abstract Background Digital public health (DiPH) professionals are crucial for a successful digital transformation in social and health care. However, the extent to which academic professionals are taught DiPH-related content in their public health studies in Germany remains unclear. Methods We used a systematic module handbook analysis to assess accredited full-time public health-oriented degree programs at German Universities for DiPH-related modules. Programs were identified through the Hochschulkompass platform and among the German Public Health Association member programs. We used MAXQDA for the content analysis of the included module handbooks. Results We identified 79 public health programs. Of these, 10 Bachelor’s and 6 Master’s offered at least one DiPH module, all being highly heterogeneous in their overall addressed public health subfields. Regarding DiPH, 6 programs lectured on the ethics of digitalizing health and data protection, 5 programs each offered modules on DiPH in health policy, on data science in healthcare and software used for eHealth, or on the digital determinants of health. 4 programs each included modules on digital health promotion and alternative evaluation methods. 3 programs each addressed digital science communication and health technology assessment. Finally, 2 programs had modules on digital epidemiology. We found differences between the common understanding of DiPH in academia and the content in the module handbooks. The content identified in the analysis focused mainly on technical areas. Social and health science content was only marginally present. Conclusions The diverse DiPH study programs allow academic public health specialists in Germany to develop specific profiles. There is a need for further development of modules with relevance to the respective degree program to achieve comprehensive competencies in DiPH. We encourage the uptake of our analysis to develop a core curriculum in DiPH among European public health programs. Key messages • Digitalization affects all areas of life, including healthcare systems and public health. Preparing the future workforce already during their training is crucial to enable them to lead the change. • German public health programs are not fit to prepare students for their professions. Developing DiPH curricula with pre-defined and updated competencies will strengthen programs in Germany and beyond.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Public Health
Published
2024-10-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckae144.1833
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Health and Medical Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.85
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How much digital public health is taught in German public health programs? A qualitative analysis

R Hrynyschyn, Pinar Tokgöz, Anna Lea Stark, Christoph Dockweiler et al.
1 citations
European Journal of Public Health
Health and Medical Studies
0.85
article

How much digital public health is taught in German public health programs? A qualitative analysis

R Hrynyschyn, Pinar Tokgöz, Anna Lea Stark, Christoph Dockweiler, Kamil J. Wrona, Felix Fischer, J Albrecht, Celina Dunsche, A Schmidt
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Digital public health (DiPH) professionals are crucial for a successful digital transformation in social and health care. However, the extent to which academic professionals are taught DiPH-related content in their public health studies in Germany remains unclear. Methods We used a systematic module handbook analysis to assess accredited full-time public health-oriented degree programs at German Universities for DiPH-related modules. Programs were identified through the Hochschulkompass platform and among the German Public Health Association member programs. We used MAXQDA for the content analysis of the included module handbooks. Results We identified 79 public health programs. Of these, 10 Bachelor’s and 6 Master’s offered at least one DiPH module, all being highly heterogeneous in their overall addressed public health subfields. Regarding DiPH, 6 programs lectured on the ethics of digitalizing health and data protection, 5 programs each offered modules on DiPH in health policy, on data science in healthcare and software used for eHealth, or on the digital determinants of health. 4 programs each included modules on digital health promotion and alternative evaluation methods. 3 programs each addressed digital science communication and health technology assessment. Finally, 2 programs had modules on digital epidemiology. We found differences between the common understanding of DiPH in academia and the content in the module handbooks. The content identified in the analysis focused mainly on technical areas. Social and health science content was only marginally present. Conclusions The diverse DiPH study programs allow academic public health specialists in Germany to develop specific profiles. There is a need for further development of modules with relevance to the respective degree program to achieve comprehensive competencies in DiPH. We encourage the uptake of our analysis to develop a core curriculum in DiPH among European public health programs. Key messages • Digitalization affects all areas of life, including healthcare systems and public health. Preparing the future workforce already during their training is crucial to enable them to lead the change. • German public health programs are not fit to prepare students for their professions. Developing DiPH curricula with pre-defined and updated competencies will strengthen programs in Germany and beyond.

European Journal of Public HealthVol. 34(Supplement_3)
American Public Health Association (US), University of Bremen (DE), Hochschule Bielefeld (DE), University of Siegen (DE), Kempten University of Applied Sciences (DE), Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE), Institute of Public Health Zadar (HR), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Health and Medical Studies
0.85
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.