Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31315597›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2019

Establishing a theoretical foundation for measuring global health security: a scoping review.

Sanjana J Ravi, Diane Meyer, Elizabeth Cameron, Michelle Nalabandian, Beenish Pervaiz, Jennifer B Nuzzo

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Transmission of Antimicrobial Resistant Bacteria at the Hajj: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sanjana J RaviThe Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, 621 East Pratt Street, Pier IV Building, Suite 210, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA. sanjana@jhu.edu.
Diane MeyerThe Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, 621 East Pratt Street, Pier IV Building, Suite 210, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.
Elizabeth CameronNuclear Threat Initiative, 1776 Eye Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC, 20006, USA.
Michelle NalabandianNuclear Threat Initiative, 1776 Eye Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC, 20006, USA.
Beenish PervaizWatson Institute for International & Public Affairs, Brown University, 111 Thayer Street, Suite 215, Box 1970, Providence, RI, 02912, USA.
Jennifer B NuzzoThe Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, 621 East Pratt Street, Pier IV Building, Suite 210, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince the 2014-2016 West Africa Ebola epidemic, the concept of measuring health security capacity has become increasingly important within the broader context of health systems-strengthening, enhancing responses to public health emergencies, and reducing global catastrophic biological risks. Efforts to regularly and sustainably track the evolution of health security capabilities and capacities over time - while also accounting for political, social, and environmental risks - could help countries progress toward eliminating sources of health insecurity. We sought to aggregate evidence-based principles that capture a country's baseline public health and healthcare capabilities, its health security system performance before and during infectious disease crises, and its broader social, political, security, and ecological risk environments.

methodsWe conducted a scoping review of English-language scholarly and gray literature to identify evidence- and practice-based indicators and proxies for measuring health security at the country level over time. We then used a qualitative coding framework to identify recurrent themes in the literature and synthesize foundational principles for measuring global health security. Documents reviewed included English-language literature published after 2001 until the end of the research period-September 2017-to ensure relevance to the current global health security landscape; literature examining acute infectious disease threats with potential for transnational spread; and literature addressing global health security efforts at the country level.

resultsWe synthesized four foundational principles for measuring global health security: measurement requires assessment of existing capacities, as well as efforts to build core public health, healthcare, and biosecurity capabilities; assessments of national programs and efforts to mitigate a critical subset of priority threats could inform efforts to generate useful metrics for global health security; there are measurable enabling factors facilitating health security-strengthening efforts; and finally, measurement requires consideration of social, political, and ecological risk environments.

conclusionThe themes identified in this review could inform efforts to systematically assess the impacts and effectiveness of activities undertaken to strengthen global health security.

Indexed as

Global HealthHumansModels, TheoreticalSecurity MeasuresAssessmentGlobal health securityMeasurementPublic health

Identifiers

PMID31315597
PMCPMC6637489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.