Abstract
Effective communication of scientific results to policy and decision makers has been a longstanding challenge in times of crises. This communication takes many forms - visualisations, reports, presentations - and requires careful consideration to ensure accurate maintenance of the key scientific messages. Science-to-policy communication is further exacerbated when presenting fundamentally uncertain forms of science such as infectious disease modelling and other types of modelled evidence, something which has been understudied. Here we assess the communication and visualisation of modelling results to national COVID-19 policy and decision makers in 13 different countries. We present a synthesis of recommendations on what aspects of visuals, graphs, and plots policymakers found to be most helpful in their COVID-19 response work. This work serves as a first evidence base for developing essential guidance on scientific communication in emergency settings.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
LH acknowledges support from the Wellcome Trust (block grant no. RG92770). SF also acknowledges support from the Wellcome Trust (grant no. 210758/Z/18/Z).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This research study has been reviewed by the University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee (application number PRE.2023.034).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵c Independent researcher
Funding: Wellcome Trust.
Minor edits to wording/ ordering for journal style.
