Grimaud, Olivier, Foucrier, Mathilde, Czabanowska, Kasia, Barnes, Sarah, Bauernfeind, Ariane, Clemens, Timo, Codd, Mary, Donneau, Anne-Françoise, Sowada, Christoph, Keller, Catherine, Gely-Pernot, Aurore, Mueller, Judith, Guevel, Marie-Renée, Bodeau-Livinec, Florence, and Théault, Laurence
Background: Public health education aims at producing a competent workforce. The WHO-ASPHER framework proposes a set of relevant public health competencies organised in 10 sections (e.g. science practice, leadership, law policies and ethics etc). As part of the Europubhealth (EPH) consortium, eight universities collaborate for the delivery of a 2-year international public health master course. The training pathway includes a first "foundation" year, with a choice of four options (components), and a second "specialisation" year with a choice of seven components. In 2020, EPH consortium decided to use the WHO-ASPHER framework in order to map the competencies addressed and the level of proficiency targeted by each component of its master course. Methods: An 84-item questionnaire covering the whole WHO-ASPHER framework was sent to the 11 EPH component coordinators, asking them to rate the proficiency levels targeted at the end of their courses. Answers from each coordinator were summarised by calculating mean proficiency levels for each of the 10 competency sections. We used Bland & Altman plots to explore heterogeneity of answers and then calculated transformed scores to account for rating heterogeneity. We use tabulation and a heat map to explore patterns of proficiency levels across components. Results: There were differences in overall proficiency levels between years with, as expected, higher scores in year two. Year one components reached medium to high proficiency scores for the sections "science practice", "health promotion" and "communication" with scores ranging from 2.6 to 3 (on a 1-low to 4-high scale). When compared with year one on a heat-map, year two components displayed more contrasted profiles, typically aiming for high proficiency level (i.e. scores above 3.5) on 3 out of the 10 sections of competencies. Except for the "collaborations and partnership" section, the training pathways offered by the EPH master course seem to offer opportunities for a high proficiency level in all domains of competencies. Conclusions: The mapping proved a useful exercise to identify strengths and complementarities among the EPH consortium. The results suggest that the EPH master course is coherent and offers students opportunities to gain proficiency in most competencies relevant to public health practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]