Systems Thinking and Complexity Science Methods and the Policy Process in Non-Communicable Disease Prevention: A Systematic Scoping Review

Background: Given the complex determinants of non-communicable diseases (NCDs), and the dynamic policy landscape, researchers and policymakers are exploring the use of systems thinking and complexity science (STCS) in developing effective policies. The aim of this review is to systematically identify and analyse existing applications of STCS-informed methods in NCD prevention policy. Methods: Systematic scoping review: We searched academic databases (Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE) for all publications indexed by 13 October 2020, screening titles, abstracts and full texts and extracting data according to published guidelines. We summarised key data from each study, mapping applications of methods informed by STCS to policy process domains. We conducted a thematic analysis to identify advantages, limitations, barriers and facilitators to using STCS. Results: 4681 papers were screened and 112 papers were included in this review. The most common policy areas were tobacco control, obesity prevention and physical activity promotion. Methods applied included system dynamics modelling, agent-based modelling and concept mapping. Advantages included supporting evidence-informed decision-making; modelling complex systems and addressing multi-sectoral problems. Limitations included the abstraction of reality by STCS methods, despite aims of encompassing greater complexity. Challenges included resource-intensiveness; lack of stakeholder trust in models; and results that were too complex to be comprehensible to stakeholders. Ensuring stakeholder ownership and presenting findings in a user-friendly way facilitated STCS use. Conclusion: This review maps the proliferating applications of STCS methods in NCD prevention policy. STCS methods have the potential to generate tailored and dynamic evidence, adding robustness to evidence-informed policymaking, but must be accessible to policy stakeholders and have strong stakeholder ownership to build consensus and change stakeholder perspectives. Evaluations of whether, and under what circumstances, STCS methods lead to more effective policies compared to conventional methods are lacking, and would enable more targeted and constructive use of these methods.</jats:p

Policies to prevent zoonotic spillover: protocol for a systematic scoping review of evaluative evidence

INTRODUCTION: The increasing incidence of pathogen transmission from animals to humans (zoonotic spillover events) has been attributed to behavioural practices and ecological and socioeconomic change. As these events sometimes involve pathogens with epidemic or pandemic potential, they pose a serious threat to population health. Public policies may play a key role in preventing these events. The aim of this review is to identify evaluations of public policies that target the determinants of zoonotic spillover, examining approaches taken to evaluation, choice of outcomes measures and evidence of effectiveness. Our approach to identifying and analysing this literature will be informed by a One Health lens, acknowledging the interconnectedness of human, animal and environmental health. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic scoping review methodology will be used. To identify articles, we will search Medline, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Global Health in May 2021 using search terms combining animal health and the animal-human interface, public policy, prevention and zoonoses. We will screen titles and abstracts and extract data according to published guidelines for scoping reviews. All evaluations of public policies aiming to prevent zoonotic spillover events will be eligible for inclusion. We will summarise key data from each study, mapping policies along the spillover pathway and outlining the range of policies, approaches to evaluation and outcome measures. Review findings will provide a useful reference for researchers and practitioners, outlining the state of the evaluative evidence around policies to prevent zoonotic spillover. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required, because the study does not involve primary data collection. The findings of this study will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, presentations and summaries for key stakeholders