Cargando…

Evidence in decision-making in the context of COVID-19 in Latin America

BACKGROUND: The pace of the COVID-19 pandemic poses an unprecedented challenge to the evidence-to-decision process. Latin American countries have responded to COVID-19 by introducing interventions to both mitigate the risk of infection and to treat cases. Understanding how evidence is used to inform...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stanford, Victoria, Gresh, Lionel, Toledo, Joao, Méndez, Jairo, Aldighieri, Sylvain, Reveiz, Ludovic
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9299752/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35879980
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2022.100322
_version_ 1784751048230961152
author Stanford, Victoria
Gresh, Lionel
Toledo, Joao
Méndez, Jairo
Aldighieri, Sylvain
Reveiz, Ludovic
author_facet Stanford, Victoria
Gresh, Lionel
Toledo, Joao
Méndez, Jairo
Aldighieri, Sylvain
Reveiz, Ludovic
author_sort Stanford, Victoria
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The pace of the COVID-19 pandemic poses an unprecedented challenge to the evidence-to-decision process. Latin American countries have responded to COVID-19 by introducing interventions to both mitigate the risk of infection and to treat cases. Understanding how evidence is used to inform government-level decision-making at a national scale is crucial for informing country and regional actors in ongoing response efforts. OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken between February-May 2021 and aims to characterise the best available evidence (BAE) and assess the extent to which it was used to inform decision-making in 21 Latin American countries, in relation to pharmaceutical (PI) and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) related to COVID-19, including the use of therapeutics (corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine and ivermectin), facemask use in the community setting and the use of diagnostic tests as a requirement for international travel. METHOD: A three-phase methodology was used to; (i) characterise the BAE for each intervention using an umbrella review, (ii) identify government-level decisions for each intervention through a document review and (iii) assess the use of evidence to inform decisions using a novel adapted framework analysis. FINDINGS: The BAE is characterized by 17 living and non-living systematic reviews as evolving, and particularly uncertain for NPIs. 107 country-level documents show variation in both content and timing of decision outcomes across intervention types, with the majority of decisions taken at a time of evidence uncertainty, with only 5 documents including BAE. Seven out of eight key indicators of an evidence-to-decision process were identified more frequently among PIs than either NPI of facemask use or testing prior to travel. Overall evidence use was reported more frequently among PIs than either NPI of facemask use or travel testing (92%, 28% and 29%, respectively). INTERPRETATION: There are limitations in the extent to which evidence use in decision-making is reported across the Latin America region. Institutionalising this process and grounding it in existing and emerging methodologies can facilitate the rapid response in an emergency setting. FUNDING: No funding was sourced for this work.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9299752
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92997522022-07-21 Evidence in decision-making in the context of COVID-19 in Latin America Stanford, Victoria Gresh, Lionel Toledo, Joao Méndez, Jairo Aldighieri, Sylvain Reveiz, Ludovic Lancet Reg Health Am Articles BACKGROUND: The pace of the COVID-19 pandemic poses an unprecedented challenge to the evidence-to-decision process. Latin American countries have responded to COVID-19 by introducing interventions to both mitigate the risk of infection and to treat cases. Understanding how evidence is used to inform government-level decision-making at a national scale is crucial for informing country and regional actors in ongoing response efforts. OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken between February-May 2021 and aims to characterise the best available evidence (BAE) and assess the extent to which it was used to inform decision-making in 21 Latin American countries, in relation to pharmaceutical (PI) and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) related to COVID-19, including the use of therapeutics (corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine and ivermectin), facemask use in the community setting and the use of diagnostic tests as a requirement for international travel. METHOD: A three-phase methodology was used to; (i) characterise the BAE for each intervention using an umbrella review, (ii) identify government-level decisions for each intervention through a document review and (iii) assess the use of evidence to inform decisions using a novel adapted framework analysis. FINDINGS: The BAE is characterized by 17 living and non-living systematic reviews as evolving, and particularly uncertain for NPIs. 107 country-level documents show variation in both content and timing of decision outcomes across intervention types, with the majority of decisions taken at a time of evidence uncertainty, with only 5 documents including BAE. Seven out of eight key indicators of an evidence-to-decision process were identified more frequently among PIs than either NPI of facemask use or testing prior to travel. Overall evidence use was reported more frequently among PIs than either NPI of facemask use or travel testing (92%, 28% and 29%, respectively). INTERPRETATION: There are limitations in the extent to which evidence use in decision-making is reported across the Latin America region. Institutionalising this process and grounding it in existing and emerging methodologies can facilitate the rapid response in an emergency setting. FUNDING: No funding was sourced for this work. Elsevier 2022-07-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9299752/ /pubmed/35879980 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2022.100322 Text en © 2022 Pan American Health Organization. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Articles
Stanford, Victoria
Gresh, Lionel
Toledo, Joao
Méndez, Jairo
Aldighieri, Sylvain
Reveiz, Ludovic
Evidence in decision-making in the context of COVID-19 in Latin America
title Evidence in decision-making in the context of COVID-19 in Latin America
title_full Evidence in decision-making in the context of COVID-19 in Latin America
title_fullStr Evidence in decision-making in the context of COVID-19 in Latin America
title_full_unstemmed Evidence in decision-making in the context of COVID-19 in Latin America
title_short Evidence in decision-making in the context of COVID-19 in Latin America
title_sort evidence in decision-making in the context of covid-19 in latin america
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9299752/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35879980
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2022.100322
work_keys_str_mv AT stanfordvictoria evidenceindecisionmakinginthecontextofcovid19inlatinamerica
AT greshlionel evidenceindecisionmakinginthecontextofcovid19inlatinamerica
AT toledojoao evidenceindecisionmakinginthecontextofcovid19inlatinamerica
AT mendezjairo evidenceindecisionmakinginthecontextofcovid19inlatinamerica
AT aldighierisylvain evidenceindecisionmakinginthecontextofcovid19inlatinamerica
AT reveizludovic evidenceindecisionmakinginthecontextofcovid19inlatinamerica