Many Korean physicians recognize that medical professionalism is, by nature, a public good. Yet they also share a growing sense of exclusion from key decision-making processes in health policy. This accumulated sense of exclusion has contributed to a widening perception that government-led health reforms lack transparency and fairness. At this critical juncture, any reform agenda must therefore begin with a commitment to procedural justice—that is, ensuring fairness, transparency, inclusiveness, and the possibility of revision in both policymaking and implementation.

In particular, because stakeholders’ perspectives have historically been excluded from decisions on health insurance budget allocation and national research funding, many professionals remain skeptical of reforms driven solely from the top down. Following the principles advanced by Norman Daniels, who extended John Rawls’s theory of justice, accountability for reasonableness defines procedural justice not as equality of outcomes, but as a system of open deliberation and fair process through which diverse stakeholders can reach legitimate agreement [2]. In public health, this entails setting national goals collaboratively between citizens and experts. In research, it means treating data and evidence not as instruments of control but as shared public goods. As an open-access journal, Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives embodies precisely these values.

This issue revisits the meaning of research and policy from that perspective. The studies presented here underscore the importance of evidence-based policy and equity-centered protection for vulnerable populations. The Korean time-series analysis of scrub typhus and climate variability highlights the limitations of relying solely on mean temperature and humidity as indicators and calls for more dynamic and adaptive surveillance models. Meanwhile, the community-based infectious disease surveillance study from Malaysia exemplifies procedural fairness at the local level, showing how early-warning systems for high-risk regions and populations can empower communities and strengthen trust in public health systems. The study on tuberculosis (TB) adherence in Morocco reminds us that while directly observed treatment, short-course remains a cornerstone of TB control, adherence challenges persist. Its findings suggest that digital tools and telehealth interventions can provide practical solutions for patient-centered follow-up.

The comparative analysis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine innovation in Brazil, Cuba, India, and Iran demonstrates that scientific capacity alone does not guarantee vaccine sovereignty. Instead, institutional coherence, public R&D, and effective policy coordination form the true foundations of self-reliance. The study highlights that low- and middle-income countries must strengthen pandemic preparedness through South–South collaboration and regional manufacturing networks, supported by sustained public investment, adaptive regulation, and strategic intellectual property rights to ensure both sovereignty and equitable access. The accompanying Korean COVID-19 Vaccine Injury Compensation Program experiment offers an important complement to this global discussion. It provides empirical evidence that when a compensation program is communicated as a symbol of fairness and solidarity, public trust and vaccine acceptance both increase. This finding provides a direct, evidence-based rationale for designing public health communication strategies that emphasize shared social values rather than administrative procedures.

In the field of chronic disease, the Turkish study on diabetes medication self-efficacy demonstrates that empowering individuals in self-management improves both health outcomes and system efficiency. Among older adults, higher self-efficacy is strongly associated with better quality of life, underscoring the need for education and psychosocial support systems that reinforce autonomy and adherence. Similarly, the Korean national study on digital literacy among older adults identifies digital competence as a new determinant of health equity and life satisfaction. Digital inclusion must therefore be regarded not merely as a technical issue but as a social responsibility linked to the right of access to information and health. The findings highlight the need for tailored interventions, particularly for vulnerable groups such as the less educated, low-income, and socially isolated older adults.

The Vietnamese longitudinal cohort study linking intimate partner violence during pregnancy with postpartum depression and child development demonstrates that gender-based violence lies at the intersection of public health and social justice. By establishing this connection in a low- and middle-income country context, the study expands the global evidence base and reinforces the principle that preventing and addressing such violence is not only a matter of women’s health but also an essential intergenerational equity strategy—protecting maternal and child mental health across generations.

Collectively, the articles in this issue emphasize public health systems, governance transitions, and implementation science. While this composition reflects the growing maturity of policy-relevant research, it also reveals a relative lack of contributions from basic or mechanistic science, which remains a point of regret. In the long term, sustainable innovation in public health will require stronger integration between basic science and applied research, ensuring that discovery and implementation inform each other in a continuous cycle.

Citations to this article as recorded by