COVID-19 建模工作为中低收入国家政策决策提供的经验教训。

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Collins J Owek, Fatuma Hassan Guleid, Justinah Maluni, Joyline Jepkosgei, Vincent O Were, So Yoon Sim, Raymond Cw Hutubessy, Brittany L Hagedorn, Jacinta Nzinga, Jacquie Oliwa
{"title":"COVID-19 建模工作为中低收入国家政策决策提供的经验教训。","authors":"Collins J Owek, Fatuma Hassan Guleid, Justinah Maluni, Joyline Jepkosgei, Vincent O Were, So Yoon Sim, Raymond Cw Hutubessy, Brittany L Hagedorn, Jacinta Nzinga, Jacquie Oliwa","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic had devastating health and socioeconomic effects, partly due to policy decisions to mitigate them. Little evidence exists of approaches that guided decisions in settings with limited pre-pandemic modelling capacity. We thus sought to identify knowledge translation mechanisms, enabling factors and structures needed to effectively translate modelled evidence into policy decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used convergent mixed methods in a participatory action approach, with quantitative data from a survey and qualitative data from a scoping review, in-depth interviews and workshop notes. Participants included researchers and policy actors involved in COVID-19 evidence generation and decision-making. They were mostly from lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Africa, Southeast Asia and Latin America. Quantitative and qualitative data integration occurred during data analysis through triangulation and during reporting in a narrative synthesis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We engaged 147 researchers and 57 policy actors from 28 countries. We found that the strategies required to use modelled evidence effectively include capacity building of modelling expertise and communication, improved data infrastructure, sustained funding and dedicated knowledge translation platforms. The common knowledge translation mechanisms used during the pandemic included policy briefs, face-to-face debriefings and dashboards. Some enabling factors for knowledge translation comprised solid relationships and open communication between researchers and policymakers, credibility of researchers, co-production of policy questions and embedding researchers in policymaking spaces. Barriers included competition among modellers, negative attitude of policymakers towards research, political influences and demand for quick outputs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We provide a contextualised understanding of knowledge translation for LMICs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, we share key lessons on how knowledge translation from mathematical modelling complements the broader learning agenda related to pandemic preparedness and long-term investments in evidence-to-policy translation. Our findings led to the co-development of a knowledge translation framework useful in various settings to guide decision-making, especially for public health emergencies.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"9 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11552008/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lessons learned from COVID-19 modelling efforts for policy decision-making in lower- and middle-income countries.\",\"authors\":\"Collins J Owek, Fatuma Hassan Guleid, Justinah Maluni, Joyline Jepkosgei, Vincent O Were, So Yoon Sim, Raymond Cw Hutubessy, Brittany L Hagedorn, Jacinta Nzinga, Jacquie Oliwa\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015247\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic had devastating health and socioeconomic effects, partly due to policy decisions to mitigate them. Little evidence exists of approaches that guided decisions in settings with limited pre-pandemic modelling capacity. We thus sought to identify knowledge translation mechanisms, enabling factors and structures needed to effectively translate modelled evidence into policy decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used convergent mixed methods in a participatory action approach, with quantitative data from a survey and qualitative data from a scoping review, in-depth interviews and workshop notes. Participants included researchers and policy actors involved in COVID-19 evidence generation and decision-making. They were mostly from lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Africa, Southeast Asia and Latin America. Quantitative and qualitative data integration occurred during data analysis through triangulation and during reporting in a narrative synthesis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We engaged 147 researchers and 57 policy actors from 28 countries. We found that the strategies required to use modelled evidence effectively include capacity building of modelling expertise and communication, improved data infrastructure, sustained funding and dedicated knowledge translation platforms. The common knowledge translation mechanisms used during the pandemic included policy briefs, face-to-face debriefings and dashboards. Some enabling factors for knowledge translation comprised solid relationships and open communication between researchers and policymakers, credibility of researchers, co-production of policy questions and embedding researchers in policymaking spaces. Barriers included competition among modellers, negative attitude of policymakers towards research, political influences and demand for quick outputs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We provide a contextualised understanding of knowledge translation for LMICs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, we share key lessons on how knowledge translation from mathematical modelling complements the broader learning agenda related to pandemic preparedness and long-term investments in evidence-to-policy translation. Our findings led to the co-development of a knowledge translation framework useful in various settings to guide decision-making, especially for public health emergencies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"volume\":\"9 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11552008/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015247\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015247","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:COVID-19 大流行对健康和社会经济造成了破坏性影响,部分原因在于为减轻影响而做出的政策决定。在大流行前建模能力有限的情况下,指导决策的方法鲜有证据。因此,我们试图确定知识转化机制、有利因素以及将建模证据有效转化为决策所需的结构:我们采用了参与式行动方法中的聚合混合方法,其中定量数据来自调查,定性数据来自范围界定审查、深入访谈和研讨会记录。参与者包括参与 COVID-19 证据生成和决策的研究人员和政策参与者。他们大多来自非洲、东南亚和拉丁美洲的中低收入国家(LMICs)。在数据分析过程中通过三角测量对定量和定性数据进行整合,并在报告过程中进行叙述性综合:我们与来自 28 个国家的 147 名研究人员和 57 名政策制定者进行了交流。我们发现,有效使用建模证据所需的战略包括:建模专业知识和交流能力建设、改善数据基础设施、持续提供资金以及专门的知识转化平台。大流行病期间常用的知识转化机制包括政策简报、面对面汇报和仪表板。知识转化的一些有利因素包括研究人员与决策者之间的稳固关系和开放式交流、研究人员的可信度、政策问题的共同提出以及将研究人员纳入决策空间。障碍包括建模者之间的竞争、决策者对研究的消极态度、政治影响以及对快速产出的需求:我们提供了在 COVID-19 大流行期间低收入国家知识转化的背景。此外,我们还分享了从数学建模中进行知识转化的关键经验,这些经验对与大流行病防备相关的更广泛的学习议程以及从证据到政策转化的长期投资起到了补充作用。我们的研究结果促成了知识转化框架的共同开发,该框架可在各种环境下用于指导决策,尤其是公共卫生突发事件的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Lessons learned from COVID-19 modelling efforts for policy decision-making in lower- and middle-income countries.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic had devastating health and socioeconomic effects, partly due to policy decisions to mitigate them. Little evidence exists of approaches that guided decisions in settings with limited pre-pandemic modelling capacity. We thus sought to identify knowledge translation mechanisms, enabling factors and structures needed to effectively translate modelled evidence into policy decisions.

Methods: We used convergent mixed methods in a participatory action approach, with quantitative data from a survey and qualitative data from a scoping review, in-depth interviews and workshop notes. Participants included researchers and policy actors involved in COVID-19 evidence generation and decision-making. They were mostly from lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in Africa, Southeast Asia and Latin America. Quantitative and qualitative data integration occurred during data analysis through triangulation and during reporting in a narrative synthesis.

Results: We engaged 147 researchers and 57 policy actors from 28 countries. We found that the strategies required to use modelled evidence effectively include capacity building of modelling expertise and communication, improved data infrastructure, sustained funding and dedicated knowledge translation platforms. The common knowledge translation mechanisms used during the pandemic included policy briefs, face-to-face debriefings and dashboards. Some enabling factors for knowledge translation comprised solid relationships and open communication between researchers and policymakers, credibility of researchers, co-production of policy questions and embedding researchers in policymaking spaces. Barriers included competition among modellers, negative attitude of policymakers towards research, political influences and demand for quick outputs.

Conclusion: We provide a contextualised understanding of knowledge translation for LMICs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, we share key lessons on how knowledge translation from mathematical modelling complements the broader learning agenda related to pandemic preparedness and long-term investments in evidence-to-policy translation. Our findings led to the co-development of a knowledge translation framework useful in various settings to guide decision-making, especially for public health emergencies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信