Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37414431›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2023

Evaluation of the Global Health Security Index as a predictor of COVID-19 excess mortality standardised for under-reporting and age structure.

Jorge Ricardo Ledesma, Christopher R Isaac, Scott F Dowell, David L Blazes, Gabrielle V Essix, Katherine Budeski, Jessica Bell, Jennifer B Nuzzo

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Measuring capacities to advance global health security and bioeconomic development on the African continent.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jorge Ricardo LedesmaDepartment of Epidemiology, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA jorge_ledesma@brown.edu.
Christopher R IsaacNuclear Threat Initiative, Washington, DC, USA.
Scott F DowellBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, Washington, USA.
David L BlazesBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Gabrielle V EssixNuclear Threat Initiative, Washington, DC, USA.
Katherine BudeskiNuffield College of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
Jessica BellNuclear Threat Initiative, Washington, DC, USA.
Jennifer B NuzzoDepartment of Epidemiology, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious studies have observed that countries with the strongest levels of pandemic preparedness capacities experience the greatest levels of COVID-19 burden. However, these analyses have been limited by cross-country differentials in surveillance system quality and demographics. Here, we address limitations of previous comparisons by exploring country-level relationships between pandemic preparedness measures and comparative mortality ratios (CMRs), a form of indirect age standardisation, of excess COVID-19 mortality.

methodsWe indirectly age standardised excess COVID-19 mortality, from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation modelling database, by comparing observed total excess mortality to an expected age-specific COVID-19 mortality rate from a reference country to derive CMRs. We then linked CMRs with data on country-level measures of pandemic preparedness from the Global Health Security (GHS) Index. These data were used as input into multivariable linear regression analyses that included income as a covariate and adjusted for multiple comparisons. We conducted a sensitivity analysis using excess mortality estimates from WHO and The Economist.

resultsThe GHS Index was negatively associated with excess COVID-19 CMRs (table 2; β= -0.21, 95% CI= -0.35 to -0.08). Greater capacities related to prevention (β= -0.11, 95% CI= -0.22 to -0.00), detection (β= -0.09, 95% CI= -0.19 to -0.00), response (β = -0.19, 95% CI= -0.36 to -0.01), international commitments (β= -0.17, 95% CI= -0.33 to -0.01) and risk environments (β= -0.30, 95% CI= -0.46 to -0.15) were each associated with lower CMRs. Results were not replicated using excess mortality models that rely more heavily on reported COVID-19 deaths (eg, WHO and The Economist).

conclusionThe first direct comparison of COVID-19 excess mortality rates across countries accounting for under-reporting and age structure confirms that greater levels of preparedness were associated with lower excess COVID-19 mortality. Additional research is needed to confirm these relationships as more robust national-level data on COVID-19 impact become available.

Indexed as

COVID-19Global HealthHumansIncomePandemicsCOVID-19Health policyHealth systems

Identifiers

PMID37414431
PMCPMC10335545

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.