80 questions for UK biological security.
Bioterrorism
/ prevention & control
COVID-19
/ prevention & control
Clinical Governance
/ trends
Communication
Disease Transmission, Infectious
/ prevention & control
Humans
Pandemics
/ prevention & control
Policy
SARS-CoV-2
/ pathogenicity
Security Measures
/ statistics & numerical data
Surveys and Questionnaires
United Kingdom
/ epidemiology
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
13
01
2020
accepted:
09
10
2020
entrez:
6
1
2021
pubmed:
7
1
2021
medline:
15
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Multiple national and international trends and drivers are radically changing what biological security means for the United Kingdom (UK). New technologies present novel opportunities and challenges, and globalisation has created new pathways and increased the speed, volume and routes by which organisms can spread. The UK Biological Security Strategy (2018) acknowledges the importance of research on biological security in the UK. Given the breadth of potential research, a targeted agenda identifying the questions most critical to effective and coordinated progress in different disciplines of biological security is required. We used expert elicitation to generate 80 policy-relevant research questions considered by participants to have the greatest impact on UK biological security. Drawing on a collaboratively-developed set of 450 questions, proposed by 41 experts from academia, industry and the UK government (consulting 168 additional experts) we subdivided the final 80 questions into six categories: bioengineering; communication and behaviour; disease threats (including pandemics); governance and policy; invasive alien species; and securing biological materials and securing against misuse. Initially, the questions were ranked through a voting process and then reduced and refined to 80 during a one-day workshop with 35 participants from a variety of disciplines. Consistently emerging themes included: the nature of current and potential biological security threats, the efficacy of existing management actions, and the most appropriate future options. The resulting questions offer a research agenda for biological security in the UK that can assist the targeting of research resources and inform the implementation of the UK Biological Security Strategy. These questions include research that could aid with the mitigation of Covid-19, and preparation for the next pandemic. We hope that our structured and rigorous approach to creating a biological security research agenda will be replicated in other countries and regions. The world, not just the UK, is in need of a thoughtful approach to directing biological security research to tackle the emerging issues.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33406134
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241190
pii: PONE-D-19-34679
pmc: PMC7787535
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0241190Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Authors TM and HS are affiliated with Opencell. KM is affiliated with Biosecure Ltd. Arcadia provided support in the form of salaries for authors WS and CR. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Références
Nature. 2019 Mar;567(7749):461
pubmed: 30914817
Prev Vet Med. 2013 Jun 1;110(2):223-31
pubmed: 23273732
Vet J. 2014 May;200(2):261-9
pubmed: 24679454
Nature. 2004 Dec 2;432(7017):549
pubmed: 15577878
Environ Sci Technol. 2020 Apr 21;54(8):4706-4708
pubmed: 32223156
Elife. 2020 May 29;9:
pubmed: 32479263
Conserv Biol. 2009 Jun;23(3):557-67
pubmed: 19438873
Conserv Biol. 2009 Dec;23(6):1526-34
pubmed: 19459890
BMJ. 2009 Nov 19;339:b4571
pubmed: 19926697
Nat Ecol Evol. 2017 Sep;1(9):1215-1216
pubmed: 29046534
Nature. 2010 Dec 2;468(7324):647-52
pubmed: 21124449
Acta Vet Scand. 2014 May 09;56:28
pubmed: 24886408
Trends Ecol Evol. 2017 Jun;32(6):464-474
pubmed: 28395941
Nat Biotechnol. 2010 Jan;28(1):20-2
pubmed: 20062030
Nat Ecol Evol. 2017 Nov;1(11):1588
pubmed: 28970476
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Nov 19;110(47):18753-60
pubmed: 24218556
Nat Commun. 2017 Feb 15;8:14435
pubmed: 28198420
Glob Chang Biol. 2014 Dec;20(12):3859-71
pubmed: 24839235
Biosecur Bioterror. 2003;1(3):161-8
pubmed: 15040194
Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2019 May;39(3):351-365
pubmed: 30727764
Nature. 2016 Jul 05;535(7610):9
pubmed: 27383949
Mol Syst Biol. 2020 Jul;16(7):e9723
pubmed: 32692486
Nat Biotechnol. 2009 Dec;27(12):1109-11
pubmed: 20010587
Trends Biotechnol. 2018 Jan;36(1):4-7
pubmed: 29224719
Prev Vet Med. 2013 Jul 1;110(3-4):456-66
pubmed: 23490144
Prev Vet Med. 2011 May 1;99(2-4):122-9
pubmed: 21345504
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2018 Apr 05;6:39
pubmed: 29675411
Trends Ecol Evol. 2004 Jun;19(6):305-8
pubmed: 16701275
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 Sep;19(9):e302-e312
pubmed: 31227327
Curr Biol. 2019 May 6;29(9):R315-R316
pubmed: 31063720