ArticleBMJ global health2021
Exploring equity in health and poverty impacts of control measures for SARS-CoV-2 in six countries.
Article in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Closing the Gap in Race-based Inequities for Seasonal Influenza Hospitalizations: A Modeling Study.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025Article
- Competing societal objectives in epidemic mitigation: a modeling study of COVID-19 in the Philippines.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Generalized contact matrices allow integrating socioeconomic variables into epidemic models.Science advances · 2024Article
- Evaluating equity-promoting interventions to prevent race-based inequities in influenza outcomes.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Income loss and subsequent poor psychological well-being among the Chinese population during the early COVID-19 pandemic.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- Efficacy of government laws to contain SARS-CoV-2 spread in Mozambique.Journal of public health in Africa · 2023Article
- Socioeconomic differences in COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation and mortality in urban areas in a region in the South of Europe.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Locked Down: Economic and Health Effects of COVID-19 Response on Residents of a South African Township.Global social welfare : research, policy & practice · 2022Article
- Looking back and moving forward: Addressing health inequities after COVID-19.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2022Review
- The Impact of Maternal Prenatal Stress Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic during the First 1000 Days: A Historical Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- There are no equal opportunity infectors: Epidemiological modelers must rethink our approach to inequality in infection risk.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- The Approach to the COVID-19 Pandemic in Georgia-A Health Policy Analysis.International journal of public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPolicy makers need to be rapidly informed about the potential equity consequences of different COVID-19 strategies, alongside their broader health and economic impacts. While there are complex models to inform both potential health and macro-economic impact, there are few tools available to rapidly assess potential equity impacts of interventions.
methodsWe created an economic model to simulate the impact of lockdown measures in Pakistan, Georgia, Chile, UK, the Philippines and South Africa. We consider impact of lockdown in terms of ability to socially distance, and income loss during lockdown, and tested the impact of assumptions on social protection coverage in a scenario analysis.
resultsIn all examined countries, socioeconomic status (SES) quintiles 1-3 were disproportionately more likely to experience income loss (70% of people) and inability to socially distance (68% of people) than higher SES quintiles. Improving social protection increased the percentage of the workforce able to socially distance from 48% (33%-60%) to 66% (44%-71%). We estimate the cost of this social protection would be equivalent to an average of 0.6% gross domestic product (0.1% Pakistan-1.1% Chile).
conclusionsWe illustrate the potential for using publicly available data to rapidly assess the equity implications of social protection and non-pharmaceutical intervention policy. Social protection is likely to mitigate inequitable health and economic impacts of lockdown. Although social protection is usually targeted to the poorest, middle quintiles will likely also need support as they are most likely to suffer income losses and are disproportionately more exposed.
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.