Article type
Abstract
Background: Evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) in public health is a complex process that considers multiple factors. However, little is known about how the frameworks to support these decisions have been applied for infectious diseases prevention and control.
Objectives: To identify and describe the existing frameworks to support public health EIDM and their application in the field of infectious diseases.
Methods: We conducted a scoping review of decision-making frameworks in public health, and collected examples of their use in infectious diseases. We searched MEDLINE and Health Systems Evidence until December 2022, hand-searched websites of relevant organizations, and conducted a forward citation search of the included frameworks. Two reviewers selected studies independently, and one reviewer extracted data, with a second reviewer cross-checking for accuracy. We synthesised data to provide a narrative summary of findings.
Results: We included 15 frameworks. Seven had a generic scope, and eight were focused on specific topics (immunisation, COVID-19, or other non-infectious diseases). We identified a total of 18 criteria from the included frameworks; with each framework assessing a median of five, the most frequent being ‘desirable effects’ (n=12), ‘resources considerations’ (n=12), and ‘feasibility’ (n=12). We identified working examples for four frameworks in the field of infectious disease: ‘Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation’ (GRADE), WHO-INTEGRATe Evidence (WHO-INTEGRATE), ‘Ethics, Equity, Feasibility, and Acceptability’ (EEFA), and ‘Community Preventive Services Task Force’ (CSPTF) EtD frameworks.
Conclusions: Several EIDM frameworks for public health decision-making are available; however, most of them have not been widely applied in infectious diseases. Further research is required to optimise decision-making in public health and infectious diseases.
Objectives: To identify and describe the existing frameworks to support public health EIDM and their application in the field of infectious diseases.
Methods: We conducted a scoping review of decision-making frameworks in public health, and collected examples of their use in infectious diseases. We searched MEDLINE and Health Systems Evidence until December 2022, hand-searched websites of relevant organizations, and conducted a forward citation search of the included frameworks. Two reviewers selected studies independently, and one reviewer extracted data, with a second reviewer cross-checking for accuracy. We synthesised data to provide a narrative summary of findings.
Results: We included 15 frameworks. Seven had a generic scope, and eight were focused on specific topics (immunisation, COVID-19, or other non-infectious diseases). We identified a total of 18 criteria from the included frameworks; with each framework assessing a median of five, the most frequent being ‘desirable effects’ (n=12), ‘resources considerations’ (n=12), and ‘feasibility’ (n=12). We identified working examples for four frameworks in the field of infectious disease: ‘Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation’ (GRADE), WHO-INTEGRATe Evidence (WHO-INTEGRATE), ‘Ethics, Equity, Feasibility, and Acceptability’ (EEFA), and ‘Community Preventive Services Task Force’ (CSPTF) EtD frameworks.
Conclusions: Several EIDM frameworks for public health decision-making are available; however, most of them have not been widely applied in infectious diseases. Further research is required to optimise decision-making in public health and infectious diseases.