Using critical information to strengthen pandemic preparedness: the role of national public health agencies

Abstract

COVID-19 has demonstrated that most countries’ public health systems and capacities are insufficiently prepared to prevent a localised infectious disease outbreak from spreading. Strengthening national preparedness requires National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs), or their equivalent, to overcome practical challenges affecting timely access to, and use of, data that is critical to preparedness. Our situational analysis in collaboration with NPHIs in three countries—Ethiopia, Nigeria and Pakistan—characterises these challenges. Our findings indicate that NPHIs’ role necessitates collection and analysis of data from multiple sources that do not routinely share data with public health authorities. Since initiating requests for access to new data sources can be a lengthy process, it is essential that NPHIs are routinely monitoring a broad set of priority indicators that are selected to reflect the country-specific context. NPHIs must also have the authority to be able to request rapid sharing of data from public and private sector organisations during health emergencies and to access additional human and financial resources during disease outbreaks. Finally, timely, transparent and informative communication of synthesised data from NPHIs will facilitate sustained data sharing with NPHIs from external organisations. These actions identified by our analysis will support the availability of robust information systems that allow relevant data to be collected, shared and analysed by NPHIs sufficiently rapidly to inform a timely local response to infectious disease outbreaks in the future.

Lessons from co-production of evidence and policy in Nigeria’s COVID-19 response

“…National responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have varied considerably. 1 In Nigeria as elsewhere, policymakers made consequential decisions in a rapidly evolving and imperfect informational environment. Nigeria was at risk for an early epidemic given its air links with Europe and China, 2 which raised the likelihood of multiple introductions.…”

Improving National Intelligence for Public Health Preparedness: a methodological approach to finding local multi-sector indicators for health security

“…And how can the selected indicators inform decisions for better national preparedness? In another publication 20 we address these questions.…”

“…In part due to lack of a mechanism in place to enable the effective use of this data for decision-making. 20 COVID-19 has shown us that this fragmentation is a problem for even the best resourced NPHIs, as insufficient data have hampered many countries responses. 21 22 If NPHIs are to have robust public health intelligence to detect and even predict disease outbreaks they must be positioned to access, analyse and act on health security relevant data from all relevant sources.…”

Why you should share your data during a pandemic

“…8 If surveillance identifies modifiable factors that are successful in preventing or ameliorating disease, this is considered a major success and public health good. 9 Effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic necessitates revisiting historical conventions. While established norms such as concealing data until publication may have benefits during times of stable knowledge generation, these norms have significant costs including preventing rapid dissemination of crucial knowledge.…”