TY - JOUR
T1 - Informing pandemic management in Germany with trustworthy living evidence syntheses and guideline development
T2 - lessons learned from the COVID-19 evidence ecosystem
AU - CEOsys Consortium
AU - Kunzler, Angela M.
AU - Iannizzi, Claire
AU - Burns, Jacob
AU - Metzendorf, Maria Inti
AU - Voigt-Radloff, Sebastian
AU - Piechotta, Vanessa
AU - Schmaderer, Christoph
AU - Holzmann-Littig, Christopher
AU - Balzer, Felix
AU - Benstoem, Carina
AU - Binder, Harald
AU - Boeker, Martin
AU - Dirnagl, Ulrich
AU - Fichtner, Falk
AU - Golinski, Martin
AU - Grundmann, Hajo
AU - Hengel, Hartmut
AU - Jabs, Jonas
AU - Kern, Winfried V.
AU - Kopp, Ina
AU - Kranke, Peter
AU - Kreuzberger, Nina
AU - Laudi, Sven
AU - Lichtner, Gregor
AU - Lieb, Klaus
AU - Maun, Andy
AU - Moerer, Onnen
AU - Müller, Anika
AU - Mutters, Nico T.
AU - Nothacker, Monika
AU - Pfadenhauer, Lisa M.
AU - Popp, Maria
AU - Rüschemeyer, Georg
AU - Schmucker, Christine
AU - Schwingshackl, Lukas
AU - Spies, Claudia
AU - Steckelberg, Anke
AU - Stegemann, Miriam
AU - Strech, Daniel
AU - von Dincklage, Falk
AU - Weibel, Stephanie
AU - Wunderlich, Maximilian Markus
AU - Zöller, Daniela
AU - Rehfuess, Eva
AU - Skoetz, Nicole
AU - Meerpohl, Joerg J.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Author(s)
PY - 2024/9
Y1 - 2024/9
N2 - Objectives: We present the ‘COVID-19 evidence ecosystem’ (CEOsys) as a German network to inform pandemic management and to support clinical and public health decision-making. We discuss challenges faced when organizing the ecosystem and derive lessons learned for similar networks acting during pandemics or health-related crises. Study Design and Setting: Bringing together 18 university hospitals and additional institutions, CEOsys key activities included research prioritization, conducting living systematic reviews (LSRs), supporting evidence-based (living) guidelines, knowledge translation (KT), detecting research gaps, and deriving recommendations, backed by technical infrastructure and capacity building. Results: CEOsys rapidly produced 31 high-quality evidence syntheses and supported three living guidelines on COVID-19-related topics, while also developing methodological procedures. Challenges included CEOsys’ late initiation in relation to the pandemic outbreak, the delayed prioritization of research questions, the continuously evolving COVID-19-related evidence, and establishing a technical infrastructure. Methodological-clinical tandems, the cooperation with national guideline groups and international collaborations were key for efficiency. Conclusion: CEOsys provided a proof-of-concept for a functioning evidence ecosystem at the national level. Lessons learned include that similar networks should, among others, involve methodological and clinical key stakeholders early on, aim for (inter)national collaborations, and systematically evaluate their value. We particularly call for a sustainable network.
AB - Objectives: We present the ‘COVID-19 evidence ecosystem’ (CEOsys) as a German network to inform pandemic management and to support clinical and public health decision-making. We discuss challenges faced when organizing the ecosystem and derive lessons learned for similar networks acting during pandemics or health-related crises. Study Design and Setting: Bringing together 18 university hospitals and additional institutions, CEOsys key activities included research prioritization, conducting living systematic reviews (LSRs), supporting evidence-based (living) guidelines, knowledge translation (KT), detecting research gaps, and deriving recommendations, backed by technical infrastructure and capacity building. Results: CEOsys rapidly produced 31 high-quality evidence syntheses and supported three living guidelines on COVID-19-related topics, while also developing methodological procedures. Challenges included CEOsys’ late initiation in relation to the pandemic outbreak, the delayed prioritization of research questions, the continuously evolving COVID-19-related evidence, and establishing a technical infrastructure. Methodological-clinical tandems, the cooperation with national guideline groups and international collaborations were key for efficiency. Conclusion: CEOsys provided a proof-of-concept for a functioning evidence ecosystem at the national level. Lessons learned include that similar networks should, among others, involve methodological and clinical key stakeholders early on, aim for (inter)national collaborations, and systematically evaluate their value. We particularly call for a sustainable network.
KW - COVID-19
KW - Evidence ecosystem
KW - Guideline
KW - Knowledge translation
KW - Pandemic preparedness
KW - Systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85200560577&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111456
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111456
M3 - Article
C2 - 39002765
AN - SCOPUS:85200560577
SN - 0895-4356
VL - 173
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
M1 - 111456
ER -