ReviewInterface focus2022
An exploration of the political, social, economic and cultural factors affecting how different global regions initially reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Review in Interface focus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed.
- A global analysis of quarantine and isolation policies governing outbreak responses.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- COVID-19 Transmission Potential and Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions in Maine During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Social Participation Among Older Immigrants: A Cross-Sectional Study in Nine Cities in Canada.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Analysis of the SARS-CoV-2 inactivation mechanism using violet-blue light (405 nm).Applied and environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Culture and effectiveness of distance restriction policies: evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024Article
- Integrating health geography and behavioral economic principles to strengthen context-specific behavior change interventions.Translational behavioral medicine · 2024Article
- Preparing the occupational safety and health workforce for future disruptions.American journal of industrial medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- The Worrying Phenomenon of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Its Negative Impact on Pandemic Control Efforts: Common Themes that Emerged in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Review
- The COVID-19 experience in Africa and the Middle East.Annals of medicine · 2023Review
- Cross-sectional survey of compliance behaviour, knowledge and attitudes among cases and close contacts during COVID-19 pandemic.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Narrative Review of the Evolution of COVID-19 Vaccination Recommendations in Countries in Latin America, Africa and the Middle East, and Asia.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2023Review
- COVID-19 and telemedicine: A netnography approach.Technological forecasting and social change · 2023Article
- Reply: Healthcare Responses and Values System in Public Health.Infection & chemotherapy · 2023Article
- Nurses' Work Concerns and Disenchantment During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Machine Learning Analysis of Web-Based Discussions.JMIR nursing · 2023Article
- Article
- Geoepidemiological perspective on COVID-19 pandemic review, an insight into the global impact.Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
- The predictors of health-enhancing physical activity among working women in Singapore two years into COVID-19: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- The PRINCIPAL Network: A Model to Optimize Infection Care and Prevention in Pediatric Oncology in the Latin American Region.JCO global oncology · 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Responses to the early (February-July 2020) COVID-19 pandemic varied widely, globally. Reasons for this are multiple but likely relate to the healthcare and financial resources then available, and the degree of trust in, and economic support provided by, national governments. Cultural factors also affected how different populations reacted to the various pandemic restrictions, like masking, social distancing and self-isolation or self-quarantine. The degree of compliance with these measures depended on how much individuals valued their needs and liberties over those of their society. Thus, several themes may be relevant when comparing pandemic responses across different regions. East and Southeast Asian populations tended to be more collectivist and self-sacrificing, responding quickly to early signs of the pandemic and readily complied with most restrictions to control its spread. Australasian, Eastern European, Scandinavian, some Middle Eastern, African and South American countries also responded promptly by imposing restrictions of varying severity, due to concerns for their wider society, including for some, the fragility of their healthcare systems. Western European and North American countries, with well-resourced healthcare systems, initially reacted more slowly, partly in an effort to maintain their economies but also to delay imposing pandemic restrictions that limited the personal freedoms of their citizens.
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.