Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39521455›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2024

Lessons learned from COVID-19 modelling efforts for policy decision-making in lower- and middle-income countries.

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

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Collins J OwekDepartment of Public and Global Health, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Fatuma Hassan GuleidKEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8103-8136
Justinah MaluniKEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Joyline JepkosgeiKEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Vincent O WereData Synergy and Evaluation Unit, African Population and Health Research Center, Nairobi, Kenya.
So Yoon SimWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Raymond Cw HutubessyWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9286-5065
Brittany L HagedornInstitute for Disease Modelling, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Jacinta NzingaHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Jacquie OliwaHealth Services Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya joliwa@kemri-wellcome.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4575-2447

Funding

Gates Foundation INV-034291Wellcome TrustWorld Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe 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.

methodsWe 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.

resultsWe 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.

conclusionWe 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.

Indexed as

COVID-19Developing CountriesHealth PolicyPolicy MakingDecision MakingHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Translational Research, BiomedicalCOVID-19Decision MakingMathematical modelling

Identifiers

PMID39521455
PMCPMC11552008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.