ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2013
Pandemic H1N1 in Canada and the use of evidence in developing public health policies--a policy analysis.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Social distancing measures: barriers to their implementation and how they can be overcome - a systematic review.European journal of public health · 2021Pooled it
- National decision-making for the introduction of new vaccines: A systematic review, 2010-2020.Vaccine · 2021Pooled it
- Uncertainty displays in pandemic dashboards: a review of COVID-19 use cases.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Rocky Mountain West COVID-19 Modeling: A Descriptive Assessment of Public Health Needs During the COVID-19 Pandemic to Endemic Transition in Summer 2022.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974) · 2025Article
- The use of evidence to guide decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic: divergent perspectives from a qualitative case study in British Columbia, Canada.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- How have researchers defined institutions, politics, organizations and governance in research related to epidemic and pandemic response? A scoping review to map current concepts.Health policy and planning · 2023Article
- Centralization and integration of public health systems: Perspectives of public health leaders on factors facilitating and impeding COVID-19 responses in three Canadian provinces.Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Review
- The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on individuals with generalized anxiety disorder: assessing COVID-19 media source exposure and behaviour changes.BMC public health · 2022Article
- A scoping review of strategies to support public health recovery in the transition to a "new normal" in the age of COVID-19.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Protective Policy Index (PPI) global dataset of origins and stringency of COVID 19 mitigation policies.Scientific data · 2022Article
- Challenges to evidence-informed decision-making in the context of pandemics: qualitative study of COVID-19 policy advisor perspectives.BMJ global health · 2022Article
- Characterizing the Dynamic Evolution of Interagency Collaborative Decision-Making Networks in Response to COVID-19 in China: A Policy Document Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- How are mathematical models and results from mathematical models of vaccine-preventable diseases used, or not, by global health organisations?BMJ global health · 2021Article
- The Precautionary Principle in Zoonotic Disease Control.Public health ethics · 2021Article
- Characterizing the patterns of China's policies against COVID-19: A bibliometric study.Information processing & management · 2021Article
- Dangerous liaisons: an online experiment on the role of scientific experts and politicians in ensuring public support for anti-COVID measures.Royal Society open science · 2021Article
- COVID-19 Policy Response and the Rise of the Sub-National Governments.Canadian public policy. Analyse de politiques · 2020Article
- Family Presence in Long-Term Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Call to Action for Policy, Practice, and Research.Canadian geriatrics journal : CGJ · 2020Article
- Trust, but customize: federalism's impact on the Canadian COVID-19 response.Policy & society · 2020Article
- Development of measurable indicators to enhance public health evidence-informed policy-making.Health research policy and systems · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
When responding to a novel infectious disease outbreak, policies are set under time constraints and uncertainty which can limit the ability to control the outbreak and result in unintended consequences including lack of public confidence. The H1N1 pandemic highlighted challenges in public health decision-making during a public health emergency. Understanding this process to identify barriers and modifiable influences is important to improve the response to future emergencies. The purpose of this study is to examine the H1N1 pandemic decision-making process in Canada with an emphasis on the use of evidence for public health decisions. Using semi-structured key informant interviews conducted after the pandemic (July-November 2010) and a document analysis, we examined four highly debated pandemic policies: use of adjuvanted vaccine by pregnant women, vaccine priority groups and sequencing, school closures and personal protective equipment. Data were analysed for thematic content guided by Lomas' policy decision-making framework as well as indicative coding using iterative methods. We interviewed 40 public health officials and scientific advisors across Canada and reviewed 76 pandemic policy documents. Our analysis revealed that pandemic pre-planning resulted in strong beliefs, which defined the decision-making process. Existing ideological perspectives of evidence strongly influenced how information was used such that the same evidentiary sources were interpreted differently according to the ideological perspective. Participants recognized that current models for public health decision-making failed to make explicit the roles of scientific evidence in relation to contextual factors. Conflict avoidance theory explained policy decisions that went against the prevailing evidence. Clarification of roles and responsibilities within the public health system would reduce duplication and maintain credibility. A more transparent and iterative approach to incorporating evidence into public health decision-making that reflects the realities of the external pressures present during a public health emergency is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.