ArticleHealthcare management forum2021
Addressing prioritization in healthcare amidst a global pandemic.
Article in Healthcare management forum, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Elucidating insights on how care was prioritized, adapted, and missed during and post pandemic.PloS one · 2025Article
- Was priority setting considered in COVID-19 response planning? A global comparative analysis.Health policy OPEN · 2024Article
- Outsourcing practice-based education: The role of industry representatives and implications for clinical expertise.Healthcare management forum · 2023Article
- Examining priority setting in the national COVID-19 pandemic plans: A case study from countries in the WHO- South-East Asia Region (WHO-SEARO).Health policy OPEN · 2022Article
- Priority setting for pandemic preparedness and response: A comparative analysis of COVID-19 pandemic plans in 12 countries in the Eastern Mediterranean Region.Health policy OPEN · 2022Review
- Priority setting and equity in COVID-19 pandemic plans: a comparative analysis of 18 African countries.Health policy and planning · 2022Article
- Vaccine nationalism will persist: global public goods need effective engagement of global citizens.Globalization and health · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Trade-offs abound in healthcare yet depending on where one stands relative to the stages of a pandemic, choice making may be more or less constrained. During the early stages of COVID-19 when there was much uncertainty, healthcare systems faced greater constraints and focused on the singular criterion of "flattening the curve." As COVID-19 progressed and the first wave diminished (relatively speaking depending on the jurisdiction), more opportunities presented for making explicit choices between COVID and non-COVID patients. Then, as the second wave surged, again decision makers were more constrained even as more information and greater understanding developed. Moving out of the pandemic to recovery, choice making becomes paramount as there are no set rules to lean back into historical patterns of resource allocation. In fact, the opportunity at hand, when using explicit tools for priority setting based on economic and ethical principles, is significant.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.