Introduction/Issue:
Migration is globally recognised as a determinant of health. The transition for culturally diverse communities towards adopting diets that align with dietary recommendations of their host country is not without complexities. Migrating communities have rich culinary traditions that reflect cultural identity and histories, and this transition erodes these significant connections in a means to meet "healthy" standards. With over one‐quarter of Australia's population being born overseas, this research explores whether the current Australian food‐based dietary guidelines and its communications are relevant and fit for purpose for culturally diverse communities in Australia.

Method:
This study critically examines whether the Australian Dietary Guidelines (ADGs) and their communication tools are fit for purpose for culturally diverse populations. Using a qualitative descriptive design, informed by the Health Equity Framework, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 8 experts in nutrition policy, cultural diversity, and health equity.

Results:
Three themes were constructed: (1) Systematic bias through a lack of consultation and meaningful data being used in guideline development; (2) Adaptation is possible, but nobody is taking responsibility, fragmented accountability; and (3) The way forward is through meaningful co‐design and equitable inclusion. findings demonstrate how exclusionary policy processes may perpetuate structural inequities and reduce community trust, engagement, and health empowerment.

Conclusion & Impact:
There are currently numerous structural inequities that prevent the dietary guidelines and their communication being fit for purpose for culturally and linguistically diverse Australians. To meet the needs of a culturally diverse population, a health equity approach to food‐based dietary guideline development and adaptation needs to be actioned. Research like this advances the discourse in public health on reframing guidelines and dismantling of structural violence within health policy to achieve equity during creation rather than adapted later. As a key nutritional tool, utilised across several sectors, embedding equity and shared governance, through genuine co-design, into policy will improve engagement and health outcomes in these disadvantaged groups.

What if public health research routinely treated marginalised women not as participants, but as experts shaping the agenda? This presentation advances a clear proposition: embedding epistemic justice within public health research is essential to achieving equitable, relevant, and impactful health outcomes, particularly in areas such as climate change and health. Epistemic justice, recognising whose knowledge counts and whose voices shape decisions, remains unevenly distributed in global health research. Too often, the priorities of marginalised women are filtered through institutional, academic, or donor-driven agendas rather than being directly articulated and acted upon.
Drawing on participatory and co-produced research conducted in Indonesia and Malaysia, this work demonstrates how reframing research processes can fundamentally shift both priorities and outcomes in climate change and health research. Through inclusive workshops and community dialogues, women from diverse intersections, including differences in socio-economic status, ethnicity, geographic location, and lived experiences of marginalisation, were engaged as active contributors at meaningful stages of the research process. In our research, this included: developing questions, identifying priorities, and interpreting findings.
The insights generated challenged dominant assumptions about women’s health priorities. Participants consistently emphasised the interconnected nature of health, particularly in relation to climate change. They identified structural and social determinants as central, including climate vulnerability, environmental degradation, gender-based inequities, safety, and access to services. These priorities reflect a more holistic and lived understanding of climate and health that is frequently underrepresented in traditional research frameworks.
Importantly, the process revealed how existing research systems can unintentionally perpetuate epistemic injustice by privileging certain forms of knowledge, particularly technical and institutional expertise, over experiential and community-based knowledge. By creating inclusive, dialogical, and culturally responsive spaces for engagement, this research redistributed epistemic authority. Women were not positioned as passive participants but as legitimate knowledge holders, shaping research agendas on issues including climate resilience and health system responses.
The key insight is not only what priorities emerged, but how they emerged. Co-production and participatory approaches enabled the recognition of intersectionality as a central lens, highlighting how overlapping forms of inequality shape vulnerability to climate and health risks as well as access to participation in research. This has implications for the relevance, legitimacy, and uptake of public health interventions.
These lessons are directly applicable to the Australian context, where climate change is an urgent public health challenge. Vulnerable populations including migrant communities, and those experiencing socio-economic marginalisation are disproportionately affected by climate-related health risks yet remain underrepresented in research design. Applying epistemic justice and co-production approaches can strengthen the responsiveness of climate and health research, ensuring that policies and interventions reflect lived realities and community priorities.
If we are serious about equity in public health, we must move beyond consultation towards genuine power-sharing in research. This requires embedding co-production, valuing diverse forms of knowledge, and centring voices that have historically been marginalised. Reimagining public health research in this way is not simply methodological; it is essential for addressing complex challenges such as climate change and health, and for building more just, inclusive, and impactful public health systems in Australia and across the Asia-Pacific region.

Climate change is increasing flood-related health risks in rural Cambodia, yet community-level perceptions and health system adaptations remain poorly characterized. This study examined how communities and health services in Battambang Province experience and adapt to climate change-induced flooding. We conducted a participatory qualitative study in three flood-affected districts of Battambang Province from 20 to 22 December 2024. Data were collected through six gender-separated focus group discussions with 50 villagers. 13 key informant interviews were conducted with village chiefs, village health support groups, health center chiefs, district and provincial health officials, and disaster management representatives. Direct observations were conducted at three health centers. Data were transcribed, translated, and thematically analyzed using QualCoder. Participants described climate change as increasing flooding, storms, drought, and rising temperatures. Flooding affected livelihoods through crop loss, livestock damage, income loss, and food insecurity. Health impacts included diarrhea, fever, dengue, skin disease, respiratory infections, injuries, snake bites, drowning risk, and women's reproductive health concerns linked to poor hygiene and unsafe water. Floods also disrupted access to health services, damaged equipment, and hindered emergency care, especially childbirth. Despite this, health centers maintained essential services through relocation of outpatient care, mobile teams, referral transport, stockpiling supplies, and coordination via Telegram. Communities also prepared by storing food, water, and essential items, while village health support groups helped disseminate warnings and health education. Flooding in Battambang has clear health, livelihood, and health system impacts. The findings highlight the value of participatory research and the need for stronger flood-resilient infrastructure, contingency planning, and targeted support for vulnerable populations.

A constellation of crises intertwined with agrifood systems is reaching a point of conjuncture and threatening human and planetary health in manners that can no longer be contemplated in isolation. Dominant discourse perpetuates sustainability as a three-pillar model across environment, social and economic domains. However, the externalities of unsustainable agriculture are intertwined with broader domains such as human health and nutrition, farmer wellbeing, First Nations considerations, and governance. Addressing the interrelated human and planetary health crises and achieving agricultural sustainability is therefore contingent on adopting a comprehensive and systems-based approach to viewing and measuring sustainability.

A PhD project implemented a comprehensive sustainability assessment instrument in horticultural production systems (n=13) in rural Western Australia; the instrument assessed quantitative indicators including but not limited to farmer wellbeing, social connectedness, input use, micronutrients in production outputs, post-harvest loss; plus a semi-qualitative agroecology questionnaire evaluating elements such as responsible governance, human and social values, and culture and food traditions. Additional thematic analysis of interview data identified key structural drivers of on-farm unsustainability including access to and affordability of land and labour; colonial legacies and altered landscapes; governance concerns; and consumer-supermarket and market related factors. This points to key targets of change for agrifood systems that exist outside the three-pillar-model and reinforces the need for comprehensive framings of agricultural sustainability in policy and practice.

The systems-based nature of farms with more sustainable attributes was a barrier to quantification of many indicators and highlighted the strength of qualitative data. To increase impact of sustainability assessments and address human and planetary health needs, in addition to comprehensive framings, assessments need to take a mixed methods approach that can capture quantitative and qualitative data. Further, to identify locally relevant pathways to sustainable agriculture, incorporating the perspectives of place-based knowledge holders in the assessment process is recommended.

This Ideas in Action presentation proposes a practical solution to a rapidly emerging public health gap: developing a culturally grounded, internationally aligned certification scheme for climate–mental health facilitators to strengthen psychosocial resilience in the face of escalating climate threats. Drawing on growing evidence that eco-worry, eco-anxiety, ecological grief, and climate-related distress are widespread yet conceptually distinct from traditional psychiatric disorders, and that health professionals report both concern and uncertainty about how to respond, the project undertakes a scoping review to map global best practices in training and credentialing for climate–mental health facilitation across clinical, community, educational and public health settings. Guided by the JBI Population–Concept–Context framework and PRISMA-ScR, the review will systematically search six major databases (Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, ERIC) alongside targeted grey literature from professional bodies (e.g., the Australian Psychological Society, Climate Psychology Alliance; the Global Consortium on Climate and Health Education). Two independent reviewers will screen records, chart data using a structured extraction template, and synthesise findings into a comparative benchmarking matrix that aligns identified programmes with six core climate–mental health competency domains and documents structural features, cultural adaptation strategies, and quality assurance mechanisms. Preliminary scoping indicates a fragmented, Global North–dominated landscape, large variation in programme duration and format, and limited evaluation of outcomes. The session will share in-progress insights from the benchmarking matrix and explore pathways for co-developing a regionally relevant certification scheme that embeds ethics, equity, and solidarity at the heart of climate–mental health practice.

There is limited understanding of asthma management outside tertiary care during bushfires, where hospital and emergency presentations reflect only the most severe cases.
This study examined changes in asthma medication use during the 2019/20 bushfires in NSW and the ACT to better understand impacts at less severe levels of illness. We applied interrupted ARIMA models to weekly prescription data from January 2017 to June 2020, with the bushfire period as the interruption.
Weekly dispensation data for four classes of asthma medications: short acting beta 2 agonists (SABAs), inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), long-acting beta agonists (LABAs), and LABA and ICS combination medications, were obtained from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Weekly mean population-weighted PM2.5 exposure estimates were modelled using random forest derived from ground readings by the Centre for Safe Air, Bushfire Smoke Project.

Results
During the study period, a total of 11,686,663 prescriptions were recorded across each medication class: 4,241,084 SABAs, 1196123 ICS, with 58,752 LABAs, and 6,190,703 combination LABA/ICS therapies. Dispensations increased across all medication classes with rising PM2.5 levels. Notably, combination LABA/ICS prescriptions rose by 110 (95%CI:-4, 224) dispensations per week for each 1 μg/m³ increase in weekly mean PM2.5. SABA dispensations increased by 92 (95%CI:37. 148), and ICS by 44 (95%CI:20, 68) per μg/m³ increase in PM2.5. LABA-only medications showed a smaller increase of 0.2 (95%CI:-1.1, 1.5) dispensations per μg/m³.

Conclusions
PM₂.₅ exposure increases asthma medication demand, particularly during extreme bushfires. This rise is driven by adults aged 12–64, with additional increases in those aged 65 and over. Notably, no change is seen in children under 12 years, despite their overrepresentation in bushfire-related emergency department presentations.

Background:
School food environments play an important role in developing children’s nutrition habits, wellbeing and learning outcomes. With increasing food insecurity and cost of living, rising wellbeing concerns and limited capacity for schools to respond to student needs, it has highlighted the importance of a whole school approach to school food systems. While healthy eating policies and programs are well established, implementation can lack cohesion when responsibility sits within a single sector or program. Sustainable outcomes for school food environments require shared ownership across health, education, food and community sectors.
Objective:
The presentation will discuss how building strong partnerships with relevant organisations and identifying shared goals and opportunities to respond to expressed community needs lay the foundations for success. Common barriers in food systems work will also be explored, including workforce and resource limitations and navigating differing organisational priorities.
Case study in practice:
Through the experiences of the Vic Kids Eat Well breakfast club implementation, this will demonstrate how cross-sector collaboration can strengthen school food and drink environments and support student wellbeing. It highlights the role of health promoters in helping schools translate policy into practice through partnership building, systems thinking, capacity building and alignment with education and wellbeing priorities. Key enablers for successful collaboration are also addressed. It will highlight how these principles have been successful through the coordinated approach between the Vic Kids Eat Well team at Cancer Council Victoria, The Healthy Eating Advisory service, Foodbank Victoria, Department of Health, Department of Education, Community Health and Victorian schools.
Significance:
Moving beyond standalone programs towards a systems approach and shared ownership across sectors can strengthen the sustainability, reach and impact of school food environment initiatives and support healthier futures for children and communities.

What if we planned for public health workforces based on what people actually do, rather than what their job title says? A function-based approach to workforce classification could make Australia's public health workforce more visible. This would enable surge capacity for public health emergencies, equitable workforce entry, and workforce investment decisions grounded in evidence rather than assumption.

Australia lacks a reliable mechanism to count, describe, or plan for its public health workforce. The Occupation Standard Classification for Australia (OSCA) groups workers by occupational title and credential rather than by function. This means epidemiologists as one example are classified as statisticians, health promotion officers, or community workers. Many public health roles are scattered across unrelated occupational categories or absent entirely. The workers most disadvantaged are those whose capabilities exceed their formal credentials. These include internationally trained practitioners, community health workers, and people entering public health through non-traditional pathways.

PhD research currently underway at the Australian National University uses the applied epidemiology workforce as a proof of concept for a function-based approach to workforce classification. Preliminary findings from a systematic rapid review of global literature reveal that the same workforce functions are described as competencies, tasks, scope of practice, and essential public health services across different frameworks with no nationally consistent definition. A modified Delphi consensus study with Australian epidemiology practitioners will consolidate these findings into a function-based taxonomy of applied epidemiology work, designed to be replicable across public health domains.

Key outputs include a taxonomy of workforce functions that makes the epidemiology workforce visible and enumerable. This supports equity in workforce entry, workforce investment, and planning for the next public health emergency.

Medical students represent the foundation of tomorrow's health workforce, yet the training environments designed to produce them are systematically generating stress burdens that threaten their wellbeing, professional development, and long-term workforce sustainability. Despite a substantial body of research documenting high rates of psychological distress among medical students globally, the field has remained largely outcome-focused, with limited attention to systematically mapping and conceptually organising the underlying sources of that stress. This scoping review addressed that gap by mapping stressors associated with perceived stress among undergraduate medical students across 57 empirical studies spanning 15 countries and multiple training contexts, published between 2010 and 2025. Using a deductive-inductive content analysis approach grounded in Lazarus and Folkman's transactional model of stress and Hobfoll's Conservation of Resources theory, we identified four convergent demand domains — academic, clinical, psychosocial, and institutional — each containing distinct subdomains that emerged systematically from the evidence. Critically, these domains did not operate in parallel. They interacted through three primary cross-domain pathways: an upstream institutional pathway through which curriculum design, assessment architecture, and organisational decisions calibrated academic and psychosocial stress simultaneously; a bidirectional academic-psychosocial feedback loop through which each domain progressively eroded the coping resources needed to manage the other; and a health behaviour re-entry mechanism through which downstream consequences of stress — sleep disruption, nutritional neglect, and loss of physical activity — fed back into the system as amplifiers rather than accumulating only as outcomes. These findings are synthesised into the Convergent Demand Framework of Medical Student Stress, a theoretically grounded model positioning institutional-level reform — in curriculum design, assessment frequency, accommodation, and psychological support infrastructure — as the highest-leverage intervention point for protecting the future health workforce. Addressing medical student stress is not a welfare issue alone; it is a workforce sustainability and public health systems imperative.

Vaping has increased rapidly since its commercial introduction in 2004; this is no accident. It reflects a deliberate strategy by the tobacco industry to attract and addict new nicotine product users.

As tobacco control policies continue to drive down smoking prevalence in Australia, the industry has adapted; promoting vapes (e-cigarettes) to expand nicotine uptake. Between 2019 and 2022–23, current e-cigarette use almost tripled among Australians aged 14 years and over.

As evidence about the harms of vaping emerges, conversations that support people to quit are increasingly important. However, many people who work in community and education settings report low confidence in navigating these conversations in a practical and supportive way.

Recognising the opportunity to strengthen workforce capacity, Quit has developed an interactive training module: Vaping and how to support cessation in community and education settings.

Co‑designed with cross‑sector stakeholders, the 45‑minute online training uses practical, strengths‑based approaches to build skills and confidence in having non‑judgmental conversations about vaping. Accessibility and engagement were central to its design, with a focus on delivering relevant, easy‑to‑understand content that reflects and integrates into diverse work settings.

Early feedback indicates strong engagement and increased confidence, with learners reporting improved knowledge and skills, high likelihood of recommending the training, and an intention to apply the learning in practice. Uptake has also extended into clinical environments and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workforces, where it has been well received for its clarity, relevance and intersectional approach to understanding and supporting people who vape.

This broader reach reinforces a key lesson: simplicity, accessibility, and relevance are essential for uptake and impact. Keeping pace with evolving industry tactics requires solutions that make it easier for workforce to embed change in practice. This module demonstrates how thoughtful, stakeholder informed design can strengthen workforce capacity and support behaviour change at scale.

We all rely heavily on digital materials, in industry and in training, however, some individuals find screens harder to engage with and prefer printed resources (Clinton, 2019). In fact, some people find using electronic resources cognitively demanding, which can lower self-regulation and self-efficacy (Ifenthaler et al., 2023). This suggests that offering alternative resources can enhance wellbeing and equity, acknowledging the diverse needs of learners.
In the current digital climate of the latest app, software and AI development, we explored whether giving a printed handbook can improve the experience, increase engagement and reduce self-reported levels of anxiety of early-career students entering into the workplace. It is crucial to explore ways to reduce these stressors, improve the experience and individual outcomes in relation to stress and anxiety levels.
In our 2025 study, we investigated the effectiveness of printed resources from the perspective of early-career public health students. We used a qualitative approach of pre- and post-questionnaires, and autoethnographic interviews. Data collected through these questionnaires and interviews were thematically analysed manually for recurring themes related to experiences, preparedness, stress, and engagement.
Findings support the theory that not all individuals thrive working with purely digital interfaces. We need to continue to consider the workforce's needs and celebrate the diverse ways we each learn and process information. Pigeonholing everyone with an expectation to work in the same format, by just using digital mediums, is not respectful of equitable access to engage in the workforce in a meaningful way.

Clinton, V. (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Reading, 42(2), 288–325.
Ifenthaler, D., Cooper, M., Daniela, L., & Sahin, M. (2023). Social anxiety in digital learning environments: An international perspective and call to action. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 50.

The rise of generative tools presents an invitation to strengthen assessment practices that ensure that public health graduates possess the meaningful and verified capabilities reflected on their transcripts. If we cannot assure competence, we cannot assure the workforce. Our future-focused solution is the Programmatic Oral Simulation Examination (POSE): a secure, live, examiner-panelled oral examination in which students reason, justify and respond in real time to authentic public health scenarios that no AI can complete for them.

POSE builds on interactive oral assessments (IOAs): authentic, real-time conversations that assess understanding, reasoning, application to novel situations, and communication rather than a polished written assessment artefact. IOAs are increasingly recognised as a secure, integrity-preserving response to counter outsourced work (1). By adopting a programmatic approach (2), POSE samples capabilities which students develop through scaffolded IOAs across their degree, then integrates them at the capstone across five non-compensatory simulation stations, each station evaluates a core domain of public health skills independently.

The result is simultaneously AI-resilient, authentic to professional practice, and defensible as assured learning. It assesses the reasoning, communication and evaluative judgement that define a capable public health professional (3).

We will share the POSE blueprint: a transferable model for any program seeking to credential its future workforce with integrity.

References
1. Sotiriadou P, Logan D, Daly A, Guest R. The role of authentic assessment to preserve academic integrity and promote skill development and employability. Stud High Educ. 2020;45(11):2132-48.
2. van der Vleuten CPM, Schuwirth LWT. Assessing professional competence: from methods to programmes. Med Educ. 2005;39(3):309-17.
3. Tai J, Ajjawi R, Boud D, Dawson P, Panadero E. Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. High Educ. 2018;76(3):467-81.

Prevalence of antimicrobial resistance and the spectrum of pathogens in dental and oral-maxillofacial infections at a tertiary-level hospital in Chattogram


Abstract:
The escalating threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) presents a critical challenge to global public health, particularly in developing countries like Bangladesh. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of pathogens and patterns of antimicrobial resistance in dental and oral-maxillofacial infections in Chattogram, Bangladesh. A cross-sectional, descriptive study was conducted at Chittagong Medical College Hospital from January to December 2023. Socio-demographic and clinical data were collected from 85 participants, and samples were obtained for culture and sensitivity testing.
Results revealed a predominance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (27%) among isolated pathogens, followed by Klebsiella species (21%) and Staphylococcus aureus (19%). Analysis of antibiotic resistance patterns demonstrated high resistance rates to commonly prescribed antibiotics, with erythromycin and aztreonam showing complete resistance. Additionally, antibiotics such as oxacillin, azithromycin, and ceftriaxone exhibited moderate to high resistance rates (above 70%). Conversely, some antibiotics, including cloxacillin, netilmicin, and chloramphenicol, showed high sensitivity rates (above 80%), suggesting effective treatment options.
The study highlighted the urgent need for comprehensive surveillance and effective antimicrobial stewardship programs in dental care settings to combat the rising threat of AMR. Findings underscore the importance of rational antibiotic use, access to healthcare, and public health education in mitigating AMR. Further research is warranted to better understand resistance mechanisms and optimise antibiotic therapy in dental and oral-maxillofacial infections.
 

What if First Aid was not just a response to emergencies, but a core strategy for prevention?

This presentation proposes a shift in how we conceptualise both First Aid and the public health workforce. Millions of people are trained in First Aid each year, yet this capability is largely framed as reactive. We argue that First Aid should be recognised as a preventative public health intervention, with the potential to reduce injury severity, improve recovery outcomes and relieve pressure on overstretched health systems.

Early and effective action in the first minutes of an incident can significantly alter health trajectories. Interventions such as CPR, bleeding control, asthma management and anaphylaxis response can reduce complications, shorten recovery time and improve survival. However, the broader system value of these early actions remains underacknowledged. By equipping individuals with the skills, confidence and willingness to act, First Aid training creates a distributed, community based workforce embedded within everyday settings.

Drawing on behavioural insights and training experience, this presentation explores how barriers to action influence whether people intervene, and how reframing First Aid as prevention can strengthen both capability and confidence. It also considers how this perspective could reshape investment, measurement and policy, shifting First Aid from a compliance activity to a workforce development strategy.

Recognising first aid trained individuals as contributors to public health opens new opportunities to build community resilience, reduce inequities in access to timely care, and support more sustainable health systems. In a future of increasing demand, prevention will not only sit within institutions, but within people.