What does it take to close the gap between evidence and action in public health?

As part of the first episode of the Building Better Ways of Knowing mini-series, Alonzo Plough joins Salma to reflect on the inaugural convening of the initiative and to discuss the expectations for the project and future convenings. They discuss the mismatches between the evidence generated in academia and the knowledge needed to improve population health. They explore the mechanisms for incorporating community knowledge in the knowledge production system in a more "valid" way while still maintaining rigor and standards, and the importance of primary data and the evolution of its role and acquisition in the era of AI. They also discuss the gap between training of public health students and what they do in practice. They also analyze public health communications—with Alonzo providing a strategy to navigate what media to consume and how to consume it to mitigate biases—and the deterioration of trust and increased polarization of science.

This conversation will challenge you to question whether public health has been asking the right questions and to imagine what better ones might look like.

About the guest:

Alonzo Plough, PhD, MPH is Chief Science Officer and Vice President Research-Evaluation-Learning at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, where he works on broadening what counts as valid evidence, diversifying the health science workforce, building equitable data systems, and understanding how place and environment drive health inequities. He previously worked in academia and directed public health departments in Boston, Seattle, and Los Angeles.

Notes:

Acronyms mentioned in this episode include:

• CDC = Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• MAHA = Make America Healthy Again
• MD = Doctor of Medicine
• MPH = Master of Public Health
• PAHO = Pan American Health Organization
• RWJF = Rober Wood Johnson Foundation
• WHO = World Health Organization

Fact-check: In minute 16:00, Salma mentions we launched a survey looking at trust in institutions across eight countries and found that trust in scientists and academia in the US was reported by 42% of respondents. The survey found that 48.0% of US respondents reported high trust in scientists and academia.

Useful resources:

• Abdalla, S., Melendez Contreras, C., Wang, Y. et al.Institutional and social trust across eight countries: distribution across sociodemographic groups and relevance for population health. Humanit Soc Sci Commun (2026). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-07684-0

Host: Dr. Salma Abdalla

Editor: Catalina Melendez Contreras

Marketing: Kinkini Bhaduri

Music: Helmut Schenker / Omnia from Epidemic Sound https://www.epidemicsound.com/music/tracks/60e14d61-23ca-4899-9c56-9a9018634986/

The views and opinions expressed by the guest in this episode do not necessarily reflect those of their institution, the funders, or the podcast team.