The experiences of 33 national COVID-19 dashboard teams during the first year of the pandemic in the WHO European Region: a qualitative study
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Background
Governments across the WHO European Region prioritized dashboards for reporting COVID-19 data. The ubiquitous use of dashboards for public reporting is novel. This study explores the development of COVID-19 dashboards during the pandemic’s first year and common barriers, enablers and lessons from the experiences of teams responsible for their development.
Methods
Multiple methods were applied to identify and recruit COVID-19 dashboard teams using a purposive, quota sampling approach. Semi-structured group interviews were conducted between April– June 2021. Using elaborative coding and thematic analysis, descriptive and explanatory themes were derived from interview data. A validation workshop with study participants was held in June 2021.
Results
Eighty informants, representing 33 national COVID-19 dashboard teams across the WHO European Region participated. Most dashboards were launched swiftly in the first months of the pandemic, between February–May 2020. The urgency, intense workload, limited human resources, data and privacy constraints, and public scrutiny were common to the initial development stage. Themes related to barriers or enablers were identified pertaining to the pre-pandemic context, pandemic itself, people and processes, software, data, and users. Lessons emerged around the themes of simplicity, trust, partnership, software and data, and change.
Conclusions
COVID-19 dashboards were developed in a learning-by-doing approach. The experiences of teams signal initial under-preparedness was compensated by high-level political endorsement, the professionalism of teams, accelerated data improvements, and immediate support of commercial software solutions. To leverage the full potential of dashboards, investments are needed at team-, national- and pan-European-level.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.23.21266747: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics Consent: Participants provided written consent during the recruitment stage and verbally restated their consent at the start of their interview. Sex as a biological variable Team members conducting interviews (four women, six men) had previously researched COVID-19 dashboards [32,50,51]. Randomization Confidentiality was assured by assigning each participating dashboard team a random code (e.g., D1) and removing identifying information from verbatim quotes used throughout the paper. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Data analysis: The first authors analysed the translated interview transcripts to identify descriptive and … SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.23.21266747: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics Consent: Participants provided written consent during the recruitment stage and verbally restated their consent at the start of their interview. Sex as a biological variable Team members conducting interviews (four women, six men) had previously researched COVID-19 dashboards [32,50,51]. Randomization Confidentiality was assured by assigning each participating dashboard team a random code (e.g., D1) and removing identifying information from verbatim quotes used throughout the paper. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Data analysis: The first authors analysed the translated interview transcripts to identify descriptive and explanatory themes using elaborative coding [57] and thematic analysis [58] in an Excel tool developed in the approach of Meyer and Avery [59]. Excelsuggested: NoneResults from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:Study strengths and limitations: Working in partnership with WHO offered unique access to our target national governmental COVID-19 dashboard teams. The composition of the research team allowed for the use of an extensive range of languages during data collection, aiding recruitment and the richness of exchanges during interviews. The study captured COVID-19 dashboards at a critical point in their development, as teams were actively improving and making adjustments at the time of interviews. It means teams were still deeply immersed in the dashboards, making for little strain to recall processes of the prior year. We acknowledge the following potential limitations. First, the size and composition of core dashboard teams varied across countries/territories and brought some variability to the profile and number of persons met with per dashboard, and ultimately, the nature of their experience. Second, group interviews stimulated joint reflections across teams, enriching data collection, though this approach could also induce group pressure resulting in socially desirable responses. Third, the findings are a snapshot of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic and may not reflect the current state of implementation. Lastly, the study included national, government COVID-19 dashboards of the WHO European Region and may not be generalizable to the experiences of subnational dashboards, other types of developers, such as academia, independent initiatives, media outlets, or industry, a...
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
