Formal and informal science-policy interaction during public health emergencies of international concern: a scoping review.

Abstract

Background: Interaction between science and policy might be a crucial asset for policy decisions during public health emergencies. Much work has been published about processes and forms of science-policy interaction on the one hand and challenges of public health emergency contexts on the other. However, more knowledge is needed to understand the challenges that arise when these two issues intersect.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review informed by the Johanna-Briggs-Institute protocol and searched seven databases to identify formal and informal approaches to organising science-policy interaction. The original search was conducted in April 2022 and updated in March 2026. The searches included Embase.com, Medline, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science Social Science Citation Index, ERIC, Global Health, and Google Scholar. Systematic reviews, articles related to endemic diseases, on clinical and hospital contexts, and impact evaluations of research evidence in decision-making processes were excluded. Information on defined procedures for science policy interaction, form of interaction, selection process of interaction participants, perception of interaction, and barriers and facilitators of the interaction was extracted. Inclusion criteria were a) describe interaction/s of researcher/s and policymaker/s, and b) describe the study setting of a public health emergency. Data analysis followed qualitative content analysis.

Results: 87 relevant studies were identified. Most included studies focused on the COVID-19 pandemic, with Scientific Advisory Committees (hereafter SACs) as the dominant mode of interaction. Informal mechanisms, such as committees without formal remit and unclear or undisclosed practices, were less frequently reported but played key roles. Common challenges included unclear roles, political interference, and limited communication. Key requirements are role transparency, formalisation, and institutionalisation of science-policy interaction.

Conclusions: Science-policy interactions during public health emergencies are shaped by dominant formal structures and underexplored informal practices. Strengthening inclusive, transparent, and interdisciplinary advisory systems is key to improving preparedness for future crises.