![]() Of course, there were particular windows for policy decisions and the evidence base did not always give a definitive answer to support one option or another at the time a decision had to be taken. However, there was a need for clinical and scientific advice on the evidence base about the pathogen and the disease it caused in order to support decision-makers. ![]() Policy decisions were for ministers to take and they involved multiple non-health as well as health-related trade-offs. what could be communicated to the public – what was known about this pathogen and the disease it caused?.what strength of evidence would be needed for different responses?.how long would these measures be needed for?.how extensive did the response need to be – should measures target only cases, or all of society?.what should the clinical response be – and what would this mean for health system response?.were there any therapeutics or a vaccine that could be deployed for this pathogen?.what were the sensible options for response, and were there public health interventions that could interrupt transmission?.This was driven by important operational and policy questions at the outset of this public health emergency, such as: Particularly in the early days of the pandemic, there was pressure to develop rapid evidence on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |