ArticlePLOS global public health2023
Proactive vs. reactive country responses to the COVID-19 pandemic shock.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing infectious disease mitigation under dynamic conditions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Strengthening One Health implementation at the national and subnational levels in the Democratic Republic of Congo: A 5-step implementation framework.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Article
- Machine learning-enabled diagnosis of viral respiratory infections from exhaled volatile organic compound analysis.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- An agent-based model of COVID- 19 in the food industry for assessing public health and economic impacts of infection control strategies.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Impact of Covid-19 control strategies on health and GDP growth outcomes in 193 sovereign jurisdictions.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- COVID-19 Policy Response Analysis: A Canadian Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Prevalence of long COVID decreases for increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Health Security, Quality of Life and Democracy during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparative Approach in the EU-27 Countries.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The infection caused by SARS-CoV-2, responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, is characterized by an infectious period with either asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic phases, leading to a rapid surge of mild and severe cases putting national health systems under serious stress. To avoid their collapse, and in the absence of pharmacological treatments, during the early pandemic phase countries worldwide were forced to adopt strategies, from elimination to mitigation, based on non-pharmacological interventions which, in turn, overloaded social, educational and economic systems. To date, the heterogeneity and incompleteness of data sources does not allow to quantify the multifaceted impact of the pandemic at country level and, consequently, to compare the effectiveness of country responses. Here, we tackle this challenge from a complex systems perspective, proposing a model to evaluate the impact of systemic failures in response to the pandemic shock. We use health, behavioral and economic indicators for 44 countries to build a shock index quantifying responses in terms of robustness and resilience, highlighting the crucial advantage of proactive policy and decision making styles over reactive ones, which can be game-changing during the emerging of a new variant of concern.
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.