IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0002601.html

The importance of investing in data, models, experiments, team science, and public trust to help policymakers prepare for the next pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Grieve
  • Youqi Yang
  • Sam Abbott
  • Giridhara R Babu
  • Malay Bhattacharyya
  • Natalie Dean
  • Stephen Evans
  • Nicholas Jewell
  • Sinéad M Langan
  • Woojoo Lee
  • Geert Molenberghs
  • Liam Smeeth
  • Elizabeth Williamson
  • Bhramar Mukherjee

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about valuable insights regarding models, data, and experiments. In this narrative review, we summarised the existing literature on these three themes, exploring the challenges of providing forecasts, the requirement for real-time linkage of health-related datasets, and the role of ‘experimentation’ in evaluating interventions. This literature review encourages us to broaden our perspective for the future, acknowledging the significance of investing in models, data, and experimentation, but also to invest in areas that are conceptually more abstract: the value of ‘team science’, the need for public trust in science, and in establishing processes for using science in policy. Policy-makers rely on model forecasts early in a pandemic when there is little data, and it is vital to communicate the assumptions, limitations, and uncertainties (theme 1). Linked routine data can provide critical information, for example, in establishing risk factors for adverse outcomes but are often not available quickly enough to make a real-time impact. The interoperability of data resources internationally is required to facilitate sharing across jurisdictions (theme 2). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provided timely evidence on the efficacy and safety of vaccinations and pharmaceuticals but were largely conducted in higher income countries, restricting generalisability to low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Trials for non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were almost non-existent which was a missed opportunity (theme 3). Building on these themes from the narrative review, we underscore the importance of three other areas that need investment for effective evidence-driven policy-making. The COVID-19 response relied on strong multidisciplinary research infrastructures, but funders and academic institutions need to do more to incentivise team science (4). To enhance public trust in the use of scientific evidence for policy, researchers and policy-makers must work together to clearly communicate uncertainties in current evidence and any need to change policy as evidence evolves (5). Timely policy decisions require an established two-way process between scientists and policy makers to make the best use of evidence (6). For effective preparedness against future pandemics, it is essential to establish models, data, and experiments as fundamental pillars, complemented by efforts in planning and investment towards team science, public trust, and evidence-based policy-making across international communities. The paper concludes with a ‘call to actions’ for both policy-makers and researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Grieve & Youqi Yang & Sam Abbott & Giridhara R Babu & Malay Bhattacharyya & Natalie Dean & Stephen Evans & Nicholas Jewell & Sinéad M Langan & Woojoo Lee & Geert Molenberghs & Liam Smeeth & El, 2023. "The importance of investing in data, models, experiments, team science, and public trust to help policymakers prepare for the next pandemic," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(11), pages 1-16, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0002601
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0002601
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0002601
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0002601&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002601?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0002601. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.