Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36942316›Full record

ArticleDialogues in health2022

Unveiling conflicting strategies in the Brazilian response to COVID-19: A cross-sectional study using the Functional Resonance Analysis Method.

Alessandro Jatobá, Hugo Bellas, Jaqueline Viana, Paula de Castro Nunes, Raquel Leal, Bárbara Bulhões, Rodrigo Arcuri, Paulo Victor Rodrigues de Carvalho

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
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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, 8 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Alessandro JatobáCentro de Estudos Estratégicos Antônio Ivo de Carvalho (CEE), Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Hugo BellasCentro de Estudos Estratégicos Antônio Ivo de Carvalho (CEE), Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Jaqueline VianaCentro de Estudos Estratégicos Antônio Ivo de Carvalho (CEE), Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Paula de Castro NunesCentro de Estudos Estratégicos Antônio Ivo de Carvalho (CEE), Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Raquel LealCentro de Estudos Estratégicos Antônio Ivo de Carvalho (CEE), Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Bárbara BulhõesInstituto de Medicina Social Hésio Cordeiro (IMS), Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Rodrigo ArcuriPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Produção (TPP), Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Niterói, Brazil.
Paulo Victor Rodrigues de CarvalhoInstituto de Engenharia Nuclear (IEN), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRNuclear Engineering Institute · BRUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro · BRUniversidade Federal Fluminense · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

By the time the present study was completed, Brazil had been the second epicenter of COVID-19. In addition, the actions taken to respond to the pandemic in Brazil were the subject of extensive debate, since some diverged from recommendations from health authorities and scientists. Since then, the resulting political and social turmoil showed conflicting strategies to tackle the pandemic in Brazil, with visible consequences in the numbers of casualties, but also with effects on the resilience of the overall health system. Thus, this article explores the actions taken in Brazil to cope with the pandemic from a systems analysis perspective. The structure of the domain was analyzed using Work Domain Analysis, and the activated functions were analyzed using the Functional Resonance Analysis Method, identifying the variability resulting from the conflicting strategies carried out and the consequences to the capacity of the Brazilian health system to respond resiliently to the pandemic. Results of the study show that functions that overlapped the operation of the overall system were introduced, causing the health system to operate under conflicting objectives, in which functions were created to restrict the outcomes of each other during the entire COVID-19 crisis.

Indexed as

Health systems agenciesResilienceSurge capacityUnified health system

Identifiers

PMID36942316
PMCPMC9535974
OpenAlexW4302363465

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.