Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35488277›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2022

Strategies comparison in response to the two waves of COVID-19 in the United States and India.

Junyan Yang, Leiyu Shi, Haiqian Chen, Xiaohan Wang, Jun Jiao, Manfei Yang, Meiheng Liu, Gang Sun

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Junyan YangDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Leiyu ShiDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Haiqian ChenDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Xiaohan WangDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Jun JiaoDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Manfei YangDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Meiheng LiuDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Gang SunDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China. gsun15@jhu.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to compare the prevention and control strategies adopted by the United States and India in the COVID-19 outbreak and analyze the effectiveness of their strategies, in order to provide empirical experience for the prevention and control of the epidemic.

methodsThis study extracted official data on COVID-19 from various official websites, summarized the policies in place in the United States and India, and evaluated the effectiveness of their policies.

resultsThe United States has adopted a series of mitigation strategies to control the two waves of epidemic, including strengthening virus detection, calling on the people to wear masks and so on. As of May 30, 2021, although the daily new cases there decreased to some extent, the effect was not ideal. The US's daily new cases ranked fourth and the cumulative number of confirmed cases ranked first in the world. India has adopted containment strategies in the initial stage of the outbreak, making the epidemic relatively stable. In the later stage, India has turned to adopt mitigation strategies. In addition, many factors including the lack of medical resources and premature relaxation measures led to the rapid deterioration of the epidemic situation. As of May 30, 2021, although the daily new cases in India has a downward trend, it ranked first in the world, and the cumulative number of confirmed cases ranked second.

conclusionThere are differences between the epidemic prevention strategies adopted by the United States and India, especially India's containment strategies which helped it better control the epidemic in the early stage. However, the epidemic in the two countries is still severe. With the advent of virus mutants and the absence of immune barriers, it is meaningful that the two countries continue to take non-pharmacotherapy intervention measures and accelerate vaccination, according to specific national conditions adopt containment strategies that can control the epidemic more quickly when necessary, and pay attention to the risk of epidemic rebound caused by premature relaxation of epidemic prevention policies.

Indexed as

COVID-19EpidemicsDisease OutbreaksHumansIndiaUnited StatesCOVID-19Non-pharmacotherapy interventionThe United States and India

Identifiers

PMID35488277
PMCPMC9053837

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.