The distinction between public health and
population health deserves
attention since it has been at times both confusing and even divisive. Traditionally, public health has been
understood by many to be the critical functions of state and local public health departments such as
preventing epidemics, containing
environmental hazards, and encouraging healthy behaviors.
The broader current definition of the public health system offered by the Institute of Medicine (1) reaches beyond this narrow governmental view. Its report, The Future of the Public’s Health in the 21st Century, calls for significant movement in “building a new generation of intersectoral partnerships that draw on the perspectives and resources of diverse communities and actively engage them in health action.”
However,
much of U.S. governmental public health activity does not have such a broad mandate even in its “assurance” functions, since major
population health determinants like health care, education, and income remain outside public
health authority and responsibility. Similarly, current resources
provide inadequate support for traditional--let alone emerging--public health
functions. Yet for those who define public health as the “health of the public,” there is little
difference from the population health framework of this blog, which defines
population health as the health outcomes of a group of individuals,
including the distribution of such outcomes within the group.
Reference:
1. Institute of Medicine. (2002). The Future of the Public's Health in the 21st Century. Washington, DC, The National Academies Press.
