跟随科学？新冠疫情期间政府顾问委员会中科学家的观点：来自五个欧洲国家的定性访谈研究。
Following the science? Views from scientists on government advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study in five European countries.
机构信息
Department of Family Medicine and Population Health, University of Antwerp, Antwerpen, Belgium.
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
出版信息
BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Sep;6(9). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006928.
INTRODUCTION
In order to tackle the pandemic, governments have established various types of advisory boards to provide evidence and recommendations to policy makers. Scientists working on these boards have faced many challenges, including working under significant time constraints to produce 'evidence' as quickly as possible. However, their voices are still largely missing in the discussion. This study explores the views and experiences of scientists working on government advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the aim to learn lessons for future pandemic management and preparedness.
METHODS
We conducted online video or telephone semi-structured interviews between December 2020 and April 2021 with 21 scientists with an official government advisory role during the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium, the Netherlands, UK, Sweden and Germany. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed and analysed using a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis techniques.
RESULTS
Scientists viewed the initial focus on biomedically oriented work during the pandemic as somewhat one-dimensional, but also highlighted difficulties of working in an interdisciplinary way. They found it difficult at times to ensure that the evidence is understood and taken on board by governments. They found themselves taking on new roles, the boundaries of which were not clearly defined. Consequently, they were often perceived and treated as a public figure.
CONCLUSION
Scientists working on advisory boards in European countries faced similar challenges, highlighting key lessons to be learnt. Future pandemic preparedness efforts should focus on building interdisciplinary collaboration through development of scientists' skills and appropriate infrastructure; ensuring transparency in how boards operate; defining and protecting the boundaries of the scientific advisor role; and supporting scientists to inform the public in the fight against disinformation, while dealing with potential hostile reactions.
简介
为了应对这一大流行病，各国政府成立了各种类型的咨询委员会，为决策者提供证据和建议。在这些委员会工作的科学家面临许多挑战，包括在时间紧迫的情况下工作，以尽快提供“证据”。然而，他们的声音在讨论中仍然很大程度上被忽视。本研究探讨了在 COVID-19 大流行期间在政府咨询委员会工作的科学家的观点和经验，目的是为未来的大流行管理和防范吸取教训。
方法
我们于 2020 年 12 月至 2021 年 4 月期间，与比利时、荷兰、英国、瑞典和德国在 COVID-19 大流行期间担任政府咨询职务的 21 名科学家进行了在线视频或电话半结构化访谈。采访进行了录音和记录，并使用归纳和演绎主题分析技术的组合进行了分析。
结果
科学家们认为，大流行期间最初对生物医学工作的关注有些单一，但也强调了跨学科工作的困难。他们发现有时很难确保政府理解和接受证据。他们发现自己承担了新的角色，这些角色的界限没有明确界定。因此，他们经常被视为公众人物。
结论
在欧洲国家，在咨询委员会工作的科学家面临着类似的挑战，突出了需要吸取的关键教训。未来的大流行防范工作应侧重于通过发展科学家的技能和适当的基础设施来建立跨学科合作；确保委员会运作的透明度；定义和保护科学顾问角色的界限；并支持科学家在与虚假信息作斗争的同时告知公众，同时应对潜在的敌对反应。
Zotero 插件