Table 2

Overview of study objective, research questions, challenges and recommendations

Objective	Research questions	Challenges identified	Recommendations
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.