Developing an Evaluation Framework for Infectious Disease Modelling-to-Policy Pathways: A Qualitative Study Across Five Continents
Roebl, K.; Iftekhar, E. N.; Oliver, K.; Fischer, H.-T.; Funk, S.; Fitzner, J.; Hanefeld, J.
Show abstract
Infectious disease modelling has become an increasingly prominent tool in public health decision-making, with its use accelerating markedly during the COVID-19 pandemic. This growth calls for an understanding of how modelling evidence is received, interpreted, and used or not used by decision-makers. There is a recognised need for evaluations of modelling-to-policy systems to understand how to best integrate modelling evidence into decision-making. So far, no comprehensive evaluation framework exists that maps modelling-to-policy pathways. This study addresses that gap by developing a theory of change for modelling-to-policy systems that could serve as a foundation for future evaluations. A qualitative study design was employed, comprising semi-structured interviews with 35 modellers, knowledge brokers, and decision-makers across five continents and diverse institutional settings, spanning high-income and low- and middle-income countries, as well as national and international modelling-to-policy contexts. Thematic analysis was combined with a backward-mapping-informed approach to develop a multi-level evaluative framework. The protocol for this study has been published on March 20, 2025, at OSF (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/J9QXV). Participants diverged in their conceptualisations of successful modelling evidence use, ranging from instrumental use to accurate understanding and consideration of modelling outputs, yet converged on shared risks: decisions informed by inadequately specified models or by evidence that is misinterpreted due to communication failures. The resulting three-level framework identifies factors directly influencing modelling evidence use across three domains (policy relevance, model quality, and communication and interaction), traces these to enabling conditions, and maps them to systemic enablers, including local and embedded modelling capacity, data infrastructure, knowledge brokering capacity, formal knowledge translation structures, established networks, and funding. The proposed framework represents a first theory of change for modelling-to-policy systems. While it requires further testing and application across diverse decision-making contexts, it offers a structured basis for evaluating existing systems and informing the design of new ones.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- How does policy modelling work in practice? A global analysis on the use of epidemiological modelling in health crises 96%
- Subnational tailoring of malaria interventions for strategic planning and prioritization: experience and perspectives of five malaria programs 94%
- Navigating vaccination choices: The intersecting dynamics of institutional trust, belonging and message perception among Congolese migrants in the UK (A reflexive thematic analysis) 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Lessons Learned From COVID-19 Modelling Efforts For Policy Decision-Making In Lower- And Middle-Income Countries 97%
- Following the science? Views from scientists on government advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study in five European countries 93%
- Public engagement and crowdfunding for health research: A global qualitative evidence synthesis and TDR pilot 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Rising Through the Pandemic: A scoping review of quality improvement in public health during the COVID-19 pandemic 92%
- Comparative analysis of policies and programs to support families and children during COVID-19 91%
- Development of the Kunonga Framework for Extending Approaches in Health Inequality and Inequity Evidence Syntheses 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Public participation in crisis policymaking. How 30,000 Dutch citizens advised their government on relaxing COVID-19 lockdown measures 93%
- Stakeholders’ views on an institutional dashboard with metrics for responsible research 93%
- Knowledge mobilisation of rapid evidence reviews to inform health and social care policy and practice in a public health emergency: appraisal of the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre processes and impact, 2021-23 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.