Skip Navigation LinksHome > November/December 2012 - Volume 18 - Issue 6 > Topology of Local Health Officials' Advice Networks: Mind t...
Journal of Public Health Management & Practice:
doi: 10.1097/PHH.0b013e31825d20ac
Original Articles

Topology of Local Health Officials' Advice Networks: Mind the Gaps

Merrill, Jacqueline RN, MPH, DNSc; Orr, Mark G. PhD; Jeon, Christie Y. PhD; Wilson, Rosalind V. MSW; Storrick, Jonathan MA; Carley, Kathleen M. PhD

Collapse Box

Abstract

Objective: To determine how a health officials' advice network might contribute to a high-performing public health systems by facilitating diffusion of innovation and best practices.

Design: A secondary analysis of cross-sectional data obtained from the National Association of County and City Health Officials 2010 Profile of local health departments (LHDs) using network analysis.

Setting: The Profile survey is distributed biannually to all 2565 LHDs in the United States. In 2010, it included a network question: “In thinking about your peers who lead other local health departments in the U.S., list the five LHDs whose leaders you communicate with most frequently about administrative, professional, and leadership issues in public health.”

Participants: The network question was answered only by the top executive. The subjects are 1522 health officials who answered the network question plus 477 named as contacts (n = 1999).

Main Outcome Measures: Measurements to assess network topology were density, centralization, transitivity, and reciprocity. At the node level, average centrality, clustering, effective network size, and clique count were measured. The convergence of iterated correlations algorithm was used to detect subgroups.

Results: A sparsely connected core periphery network exhibited minimal evidence of unified communication. Mutually connected small groups tend to clump within state boundaries suggesting gaps in information flow. The pattern persisted at the regional level with an average health official having an effective network of only 2 others.

Conclusions: Communication between peers may not be the primary way professional information diffuses among local health officials. National groups involved in performance improvement may wish to consider strategies to increase the diffusion of best practices and innovations through this network.

© 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

Login

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.