Dataset Information

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat.

ABSTRACT: Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic^1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches¹, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach² that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities³ in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

SUBMITTER: Lazarus JV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9646517 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat.

Lazarus Jeffrey V JV Romero Diana D Kopka Christopher J CJ Karim Salim Abdool SA Abu-Raddad Laith J LJ Almeida Gisele G Baptista-Leite Ricardo R Barocas Joshua A JA Barreto Mauricio L ML Bar-Yam Yaneer Y Bassat Quique Q Batista Carolina C Bazilian Morgan M Chiou Shu-Ti ST Del Rio Carlos C Dore Gregory J GJ Gao George F GF Gostin Lawrence O LO Hellard Margaret M Jimenez Jose L JL Kang Gagandeep G Lee Nancy N Matičič Mojca M McKee Martin M Nsanzimana Sabin S Oliu-Barton Miquel M Pradelski Bary B Pyzik Oksana O Rabin Kenneth K Raina Sunil S Rashid Sabina Faiz SF Rathe Magdalena M Saenz Rocio R Singh Sudhvir S Trock-Hempler Malene M Villapol Sonia S Yap Peiling P Binagwaho Agnes A Kamarulzaman Adeeba A El-Mohandes Ayman A

Nature 20221103 7935

Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic<sup>1,2</sup>. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel d ...[more]

PMID: 36329272

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundVaccination rollout against COVID-19 is underway across multiple countries worldwide. Although the vaccine is free, rollout might still be compromised by hesitancy or concerns about COVID-19 vaccines.MethodsWe conducted two online surveys of Australian adults in April (during national lockdown; convenience cross-sectional sample) and November (very few cases of COVID-19; nationally representative sample) 2020, prior to vaccine rollout. We asked about intentions to have a potential COVID-19 vaccine (If a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available, I will get it) and free-text responses (November only).ResultsAfter adjustment for differences in sample demographics, the estimated proportion agreeing to a COVID-19 vaccine if it became available in April (n = 1146) was 76.3%. In November (n = 1941) this was estimated at 71.5% of the sample; additional analyses identified that the variation was driven by differences in perceived public health threat between April and November. Across both surveys, female gender, being younger, having inadequate health literacy and lower education were associated with reluctance to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Lower perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, belief that data on the efficacy of vaccines is 'largely made up', having lower confidence in government, and lower perception of COVID-19 as a public health threat, were also associated with reluctance to be vaccinated against COVID-19. The top three reasons for agreeing to vaccinate (November only) were to protect myself and others, moral responsibility, and having no reason not to get it. For those who were indifferent or disagreeing to vaccinate, safety concerns were the top reason, followed by indecision and lack of trust in the vaccine respectively.ConclusionsThese findings highlight some factors related to willingness to accept a COVID-19 vaccine prior to one being available in Australia. Now that the vaccine is being offered, this study identifies key issues that can inform public health messaging to address vaccine hesitancy.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To conduct a Delphi survey informing a consensus definition of predatory journals and publishers. DESIGN:This is a modified three-round Delphi survey delivered online for the first two rounds and in-person for the third round. Questions encompassed three themes: (1) predatory journal definition; (2) educational outreach and policy initiatives on predatory publishing; and (3) developing technological solutions to stop submissions to predatory journals and other low-quality journals. PARTICIPANTS:Through snowball and purposive sampling of targeted experts, we identified 45 noted experts in predatory journals and journalology. The international group included funders, academics and representatives of academic institutions, librarians and information scientists, policy makers, journal editors, publishers, researchers involved in studying predatory journals and legitimate journals, and patient partners. In addition, 198 authors of articles discussing predatory journals were invited to participate in round 1. RESULTS:A total of 115 individuals (107 in round 1 and 45 in rounds 2 and 3) completed the survey on predatory journals and publishers. We reached consensus on 18 items out of a total of 33 to be included in a consensus definition of predatory journals and publishers. We came to consensus on educational outreach and policy initiatives on which to focus, including the development of a single checklist to detect predatory journals and publishers, and public funding to support research in this general area. We identified technological solutions to address the problem: a 'one-stop-shop' website to consolidate information on the topic and a 'predatory journal research observatory' to identify ongoing research and analysis about predatory journals/publishers. CONCLUSIONS:In bringing together an international group of diverse stakeholders, we were able to use a modified Delphi process to inform the development of a definition of predatory journals and publishers. This definition will help institutions, funders and other stakeholders generate practical guidance on avoiding predatory journals and publishers.

Dataset Information

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat.

Publications

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets