Scientific work and knowledge of scientific methods in local public health authorities (SCOPE) – wish or reality? Results of a semi-standardized cross-sectional survey of local public health authorities in Germany (Part 1)

Abstract

In Germany, there are efforts to strengthen scientific work in local public health authorities (LHA) to improve efficiency and effectiveness and to ensure quality in the public health service (PHS). This study looks at how LHA staff view their own knowledge of scientific methods, how often they apply these methods, and what scientific structures exist in LHA. An interdisciplinary team created a partially standardized online questionnaire for LHA staff. The survey covered demographics, attitudes towards scientific work in PHS, knowledge of scientific methods, existing research structures in LHA, and participation in research projects. The responses were analysed for both absolute and relative frequencies. The results show that the respondents rarely work scientifically, despite having the necessary knowledge. A comparison of the departments within LHA shows that staff from the field of health reporting gave the highest overall figures for knowledge and frequency of use. Almost three quarters of respondents had not been involved in scientific publications in the last five years. More than half of the respondents do not have access to scientific software or do not use it. Most respondents indicated a need for further training or counselling in scientific methods. These findings indicate that there is a discrepancy between knowledge and practical application of scientific methods and suggest that limited use of scientific methods in LHA is less a matter of motivation than of insufficient structural support. Targeted measures, such as the provision of suitable software or the further development of training and counselling programs could help strengthen, scientific work in LHA and thus improve quality and strengthen the PHS. Addressing barriers such as the insufficient legal and organizational anchoring, limited structural and human resources, and the lack of leadership culture that prioritizes scientific work, may help support evidence-based public health and informed decision-making.