Observational studyBMJ open2022
Analytical observational study evaluating global pandemic preparedness and the effectiveness of early COVID-19 responses in Ethiopia, Nigeria, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, Taiwan, UK and USA.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delayed at the Door: Impact of Pandemic Response Policies on Emergency and Critical Care in Korea: An Interrupted Time-Series Analysis.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Article
- Outbreak preparedness and response strategies in ASEAN member states: a scoping review.IJID regions · 2024Article
- Worsening of health disparities across COVID-19 pandemic stages in Korea.Epidemiology and health · 2024Article
- Article
- Indoor COFrontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- A weapon to fight against pervasive Omicron: systematic actions transiting to pre-COVID normal.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAn analysis of early country-specific COVID-19 strategies and the impact of policies, healthcare resources and cultural influences on their effectiveness.
designAnalytical observational study.
settingUSA, UK, Sweden, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Ethiopia and Nigeria.
main outcome measuresOxCGRT indices were used to quantify variations in governments' responses, and effectiveness was measured by the number of deaths as a proportion of the population. Hofstede's cultural dimensions, and the availability of healthcare resources, were analysed for their potential impact on effectiveness.
resultsEffective strategies reflect factors such as speed of governmental intervention, cultural norms, population demographics and available resources. While biases, confounders and lack of data at the beginning of the pandemic make inferences challenging, publicly available data suggest that South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan were most successful through rapid identification and isolation of cases, and effective contact tracing systems.
conclusionThe rapid spread of the highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 virus took many countries by surprise and the delayed global response contributed to the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic. The speed at which strategies were implemented is highly correlated to the number of deaths. Factors such as cultural norms and healthcare resources impact effectiveness significantly, implying that implementation of a global 'one size fits all' approach is challenging. Global preparedness should focus on effective surveillance and preparedness strategies to enable timely identification and containment of future threats.
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.