Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34228254›Full record

ArticleHealth economics review2021

Overcoming COVID-19 in China despite shortcomings of the public health system: what can we learn?

Mei Mei Wang, Steffen Fleßa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics review, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Mei Mei WangUniversity of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Steffen FleßaUniversity of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany. Steffen.flessa@uni-greifswald.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4068-1539

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic started in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. Although there are some doubts about the reporting of cases and deaths in China, it seems that this country was able to control the epidemic more effectively than many other countries. In this paper, we would like to analyze the measures taken in China and compare them with other countries in order to find out what they can learn from China.

methodsWe develop a system dynamics model of the COVID-19 pandemic in Wuhan. Based on a number of simulations we analyze the impact of changing parameters, such as contact rates, on the development of a second wave.

resultsAlthough China's health care system seems to be poorly financed and inefficient, the epidemic was brought under control in a comparably short period of time and no second wave was experienced in Wuhan until today. The measures to contain the epidemic do not differ from what was implemented in other countries, but China applied them very early and rigorously. For instance, the consequent implementation of health codes and contact-tracking technology contributed to contain the disease and effectively prevented the second and third waves.

conclusionsChina's success in fighting COVID-19 is based on a very strict implementation of a set of measures, including digital management. While other countries discuss relaxing the lock-down at a rate of 50 per 100,000 inhabitants, China started local lock-downs at a rate of 3 per 100,000. We call for a public debate whether this policy would be feasible for more liberal countries as well.

Indexed as

Contact-tracking technologyCOVID-19Health care systemHealth codesSystem dynamics model

Identifiers

PMID34228254
PMCPMC8259095

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.