• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Soc Sci Med . Towards integrated advice for pandemic policies: Insights from a qualitative explorative study on Avian influenza simulation exercises

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Soc Sci Med


. 2025 Nov 20:398:118745.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118745. Online ahead of print.
Towards integrated advice for pandemic policies: Insights from a qualitative explorative study on Avian influenza simulation exercises in the Netherlands

Charlotte Nm Waltz[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Femke W Overbosch[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Bart Blokland[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Jeannette de Boer[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Pearl A Dykstra[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Danielle Rm Timmermans[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Bas Ter Weel[SUP] 7 [/SUP], Marijn de Bruin[SUP] 8 [/SUP], Marion Koopmans[SUP] 9 [/SUP], Tomris Cesuroglu[SUP] 10 [/SUP], Anja Schreijer[SUP] 11 [/SUP]


Affiliations
Abstract

This study explores the processes and challenges involved in developing integrated scientific advice during pandemic scenarios through two simulation exercises of an Avian Influenza outbreak in the Netherlands. Using a qualitative, explorative approach, we examine how experts from diverse disciplines collaborated to create recommendations addressing both biomedical and socio-economic aspects of pandemic response. We ask whether and how knowledge from different disciplines on potential consequences of the virus and pandemic measures can be brought together, and how this might be facilitated by an Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) framework. Following Star (1988), Star and Griesemer (1989), and Star and Bowker (1999), we (re)conceptualise the WHO-Integrate-COVID (WICID) framework as a boundary object that supports practices of epistemic fluency for integrated advice. Epistemic fluency is defined as capabilities that allow people to switch between and combine different kinds of knowledge. Through analysis of discussions and ethnographic observations during the simulations, we explore how biomedical and social scientists individually and collaboratively considered the consequences of an Avian Influenza outbreak, and the consequences of potential measures. Our findings suggest that integrated assessment of the scenario may help identify blind spots and clarify the rationale behind recommendations, which could help broadening the quality of policy recommendations to include unintended consequences and communicating measures more effectively. However, differences in understandings of urgency and proportionality could lead to delays in advice. We conclude by discussing the implications for future research on evidence-informed processes of scientific advice, the pro's and cons of integrated advice, as well as implications for policy and practice.

Keywords: Boundary object; Epistemic fluency; Interdisciplinary collaboration; Pandemic policy advice; Simulation exercises.

 
Back
Top