BACKGROUND Advanced outbreak analytics were instrumental in informing governmental decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, systematic evaluations of how modelling practices, data use and science-policy interactions evolved during this and previous emergencies remain scarce.AIMThis study assessed the evolution of modelling practices, data usage, gaps, and engagement between modellers and decision-makers to inform future global epidemic intelligence.METHODSWe conducted a two-stage semiquantitative survey among modellers in a large European epidemic intelligence consortium. Responses were analysed descriptively across early, mid- and late-pandemic phases. We used policy citations in Overton to assess policy impact.RESULTSOur sample included 66 modelling contributions from 11 institutions in four European countries. COVID-19 modelling initially prioritised understanding epidemic dynamics; evaluating non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination impacts later became equally important. Traditional surveillance data (e.g. case line lists) were widely available in near-real time. Conversely, real-time non-traditional data (notably social contact and behavioural surveys) and serological data were frequently reported as lacking. Gaps included poor stratification and incomplete geographical coverage. Frequent bidirectional engagement with decision-makers shaped modelling scope and recommendations. However, fewer than half of the studies shared open-access code.CONCLUSIONSWe highlight the evolving use and needs of modelling during public health crises. Persistent gaps in the availability of non-traditional data underscore the need to rethink sustainable data collection and sharing practices, including from for-profit providers. Future preparedness should focus on strengthening collaborative platforms, research consortia and modelling networks to foster data and code sharing and effective collaboration between academia, decision-makers and data providers
Van Kleef, E.; Van Bortel, W.; Arsevska, E.; Busani, L.; Dellicour, S.; Di Domenico, L.; Gilbert, M.; Van Elsland, S.L.; Kraemer, M.U.; Lai, S.; Lemey, P.; Merler, S.; Milosavljevic, Z.; Rizzoli, A.; Simic, D.; Tatem, A.J.; Teisseire, M.; Wint, W.; Colizza, V.; Poletto, C. (2025-10). Modelling practices, data provisioning, sharing and dissemination needs for pandemic decision-making: a European survey-based modellers' perspective, 2020 to 2022. EUROSURVEILLANCE, 30 (42): 2500216. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2025.30.42.2500216 handle: https://hdl.handle.net/10449/93998
Modelling practices, data provisioning, sharing and dissemination needs for pandemic decision-making: a European survey-based modellers' perspective, 2020 to 2022
Rizzoli, A.Membro del Collaboration Group
;
2025-10-01
Abstract
BACKGROUND Advanced outbreak analytics were instrumental in informing governmental decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, systematic evaluations of how modelling practices, data use and science-policy interactions evolved during this and previous emergencies remain scarce.AIMThis study assessed the evolution of modelling practices, data usage, gaps, and engagement between modellers and decision-makers to inform future global epidemic intelligence.METHODSWe conducted a two-stage semiquantitative survey among modellers in a large European epidemic intelligence consortium. Responses were analysed descriptively across early, mid- and late-pandemic phases. We used policy citations in Overton to assess policy impact.RESULTSOur sample included 66 modelling contributions from 11 institutions in four European countries. COVID-19 modelling initially prioritised understanding epidemic dynamics; evaluating non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination impacts later became equally important. Traditional surveillance data (e.g. case line lists) were widely available in near-real time. Conversely, real-time non-traditional data (notably social contact and behavioural surveys) and serological data were frequently reported as lacking. Gaps included poor stratification and incomplete geographical coverage. Frequent bidirectional engagement with decision-makers shaped modelling scope and recommendations. However, fewer than half of the studies shared open-access code.CONCLUSIONSWe highlight the evolving use and needs of modelling during public health crises. Persistent gaps in the availability of non-traditional data underscore the need to rethink sustainable data collection and sharing practices, including from for-profit providers. Future preparedness should focus on strengthening collaborative platforms, research consortia and modelling networks to foster data and code sharing and effective collaboration between academia, decision-makers and data providers| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
2025 ES Rizzoli.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (Publisher’s layout)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
453.12 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
453.12 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.



