4.7 Article

Lessons From Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) for Pandemic Preparedness: Proceedings From a Multistakeholder Think Tank

Journal

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciad418

Keywords

SARS-CoV-2; emergency use authorization; clinical trials; warm clinical infrastructure

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Duke Clinical Research Institute convened a think tank with experts from various fields to share their insights from the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss strategies for the next pandemic. They outlined 10 key steps to an improved response and emphasized the importance of collaboration and preparedness.
While the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to present global challenges, sufficient time has passed to reflect on lessons learned and use those insights to inform policy and approaches to prepare for the next pandemic. In May 2022, the Duke Clinical Research Institute convened a think tank with thought leaders from academia, clinical practice, the pharmaceutical industry, patient advocacy, the National Institutes of Health, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to share, firsthand, expert knowledge of the insights gained from the COVID-19 pandemic and how this acquired knowledge can help inform the next pandemic response. The think tank focused on pandemic preparedness, therapeutics, vaccines, and challenges related to clinical trial design and scale-up during the early phase of a pandemic. Based on the multi-faceted discussions, we outline 10 key steps to an improved and equitable pandemic response. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic showcased collaborative successes of academia, federal agencies, and industry but also mistakes and deficiencies. We highlight critical lessons and necessary steps toward a more effective response to ensure the United States and the world are prepared for the next pandemic.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available