Affiliations 

  • 1 Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), Barcelona, Spain. Jeffrey.Lazarus@isglobal.org
  • 2 City University of New York Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy (CUNY SPH), New York City, NY, USA
  • 3 Independent Researcher, Sioux Falls, SD, USA
  • 4 University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
  • 5 Weill Cornell Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
  • 6 Pan American Health Organisation, Washington, DC, USA
  • 7 UNITE Global Parliamentarians Network, Lisbon, Portugal
  • 8 University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA
  • 9 Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  • 10 New England Complex Systems Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA
  • 11 Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), Barcelona, Spain
  • 12 Doctors Without Borders (MSF), Geneva, Switzerland
  • 13 Payne Institute, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA
  • 14 National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
  • 15 Emory School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
  • 16 University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • 17 Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China
  • 18 The O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA
  • 19 Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • 20 Department of Chemistry, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
  • 21 Christian Medical College (CMC), Vellore, India
  • 22 Wilton Park, Steyning, UK
  • 23 Clinic for Infectious Diseases and Febrile Illnesses, University Medical Centre, Ljubljana, Slovenia
  • 24 The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
  • 25 University Teaching Hospital of Butare, Butare, Rwanda
  • 26 Paris Dauphine University - PSL, Paris, France
  • 27 French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), Grenoble, France
  • 28 University College London (UCL), London, UK
  • 29 Dr. Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College, Himachal Pradesh, India
  • 30 James P. Grant School of Public Health, BRAC University, Dhaka, Bangladesh
  • 31 Plenitud Foundation, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
  • 32 University of Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica
  • 33 Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
  • 34 Independent Philosopher, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • 35 Department of Neurosurgery, Houston Methodist Research Institute, Houston, TX, USA
  • 36 International Digital Health & AI Research Collaborative (I-DAIR), Geneva, Switzerland
  • 37 University of Global Health Equity, Kigali, Rwanda
  • 38 University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Nature, 2022 Nov;611(7935):332-345.
PMID: 36329272 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-022-05398-2

Abstract

Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.