Table 2

Overview of study objective, research questions, challenges and recommendations

ObjectiveResearch questionsChallenges identifiedRecommendations
To describe and discuss the challenges reported by advisors, who include scientific experts across a range of disciplinary perspectives, regarding available evidence for informing decisions and challenges with integrating evidence to inform pandemic decision-making.1. How do advisors reason with evidence that is insufficient, evolving and/or conflicting to inform pandemic decision-making?Challenges associated with available evidence:
  • Influx of new, evolving and at times conflicting evidence

  • Concerns about scientific integrity and/or misinterpretation

  • Limited capacity to assess and produce evidence, and having to adapt evidence

Science and evidence translation efforts should shift to include how experts process, understand, and synthesise evidence for decision-making in a high uncertainty and evolving public health policy environment.
2. How do advisors integrate and adapt evidence to inform pandemic decisions in their context?Challenges integrating evidence into pandemic decision-making:
  • Multiple forms of evidence and perspectives needed in EIDM

  • Having to make decisions quickly and under conditions of uncertainty

  • Lack of transparency in EIDM

Funders, multilateral organisations, governments, and scientific organisations must re-envision how science is prioritised, funded, coordinated, and communicated in the context of pandemic and public health emergencies.
Policy-makers and leaders should codevelop strategies to harmonise global approaches to pandemic control, and spur national and multilateral investments in systems and infrastructure that promote transparent, ‘science-led’ pandemic decision-making.
  • EIDM, evidence-informed decision making.