Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36785630›Full record

ArticleDialogues in health2022

Time-series COVID-19 policymaker analysis of the UAE, Taiwan, New Zealand, Japan and Hungary.

Yoshiyasu Takefuji

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dialogues in health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 50% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yoshiyasu TakefujiFaculty of Data Science, Musashino University, 3-3-3 Ariake Koto-ku, Tokyo 135-8181, Japan.
Musashino University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are two types of policy analysis: socioeconomic analysis and public policy outcome analysis. The socioeconomic analysis is used for understanding the relationship between COVID-19 incident and mortality and building effective governance. There are two types of policy outcome analysis: general policy analysis and time series policy analysis. This paper is a policy outcome analysis of COVID-19, not a policy analysis. This paper examines COVID-19 policy outcome analysis of five countries such as the UAE, Taiwan, New Zealand, Japan and Hungary. Two policy outcome analysis tools are used in this paper such as scorecovid to generate a snapshot list of sorted scores and time-series hiscovid to identify when policymakers made mistakes for correcting mistakes in the near future policy update. Scores in both tools are based on the population mortality rate: dividing the number of COVID-19 deaths by the population in millions. The lower the score, the better the policy. The higher the score, the more deaths that make people unhappy. COVID-19 death is the most unfortunate event in life and is caused by policy. The introduced time-series policy analysis tool, hiscovid discovered ten facts of five countries. Discovered ten facts will be detailed in this paper. Visualization of policy outcomes over time will play an important role in mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19 deathsDemographic perspectiveHiscovidPolicy analysis toolScorecovid

Identifiers

PMID36785630
PMCPMC9671872
OpenAlexW4309278894

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.