Comparison of public health specialty training in Australia and England

C. A. Currie, C. Nottage, N. Spurrier, D. L. Madden

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Objectives: The objective of the study is to explore common challenges and distinct features of specialty public health training in Australia and England, given similarities in public health issues faced, shared histories and common political structures. Study design: The study design used in the study is a document review. Methods: Using current curricula, along with other publicly available documents, we reviewed organisational, selection and content elements of public health specialty training in these two countries. Results: In both countries, specialist public health training is coordinated and accredited through Faculties of Public Health housed within Royal Colleges of Physicians. However, eligibility, recruitment to training and funding routes differ. In England, entrants are accepted from a range of backgrounds including medicine, whereas only medical doctors are eligible in Australia. England has a national, annual recruitment process; Australia does not and has a less structured training path. In Australia, specialty advanced training is three years (excluding a Master's in Public Health [MPH]), whereas in England, training is generally five years (including an MPH). Curricula cover broadly common domains of public health practice although there are differences. Methods to assess readiness for consultant practice differ. Conclusions: Fostering an understanding of the specialist role of public health professionals in different countries establishes routes to share learning, encourage greater collaboration and creates opportunities for benchmarking.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)35-41
Number of pages7
JournalPublic Health
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2020
Externally publishedYes


  • Australia
  • Comparison
  • England
  • Public health
  • Specialty training


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of public health specialty training in Australia and England'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this