Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37864164›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2023

Comparison of COVID-19 vaccine policies and their effectiveness in Korea, Japan, and Singapore.

Mengyuan Ma, Leiyu Shi, Meiheng Liu, Junyan Yang, Wanzhen Xie, Gang Sun

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Systematic documentation of the introduction of COVID-19 vaccines in Latin America and the Caribbean.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2024
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mengyuan MaDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Leiyu ShiDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Meiheng LiuDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Junyan YangDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Wanzhen XieDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Gang SunDepartment of Health Management, School of Health Management, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China. sunhoney163@163.com.
Southern Medical University · CNJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to analyze coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)vaccine policies and effectiveness in Korea, Japan, and Singapore, thereby providing empirical experience for vaccination and response to similar public health emergencies.

methodsThe study systematically summarized the COVID-19 vaccine policies in Korea, Japan, and Singapore through public information from the Our World in Data website and the official websites of the Ministries of Health in these three countries.Total vaccinations, COVID-19 vaccination rates, rates of fully vaccinated, rates of boostervaccinated, and total confifirmed cases were selected for cross-sectional comparison of COVID-19 vaccination in these three countries. Combining the basic characteristics of these three countries, daily cases per million, daily deaths per million, and the effective reproduction rate were calculated to measure the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine policies implementation in each of these three countries

resultsThe countermeasures against the COVID-19 in Korea, Japan, and Singapore, although seemingly different on the surface, have all taken an aggressive approach. There are large similarities in the timing of the start of COVID-19 vaccination, the type of vaccine, how vaccine appointments are made, and whether vaccination are free, and all had high vaccination rates. A systematic comparison of the anti-epidemic practices in the three East Asian countries revealed that all three countries experienced more than one outbreak spike due to the spread of new mutant strains after the start of mass vaccination with COVID-19 vaccination, but that vaccination played a positive role in reducing the number of deaths and stabilizing the effective reproduction rate.

conclusionsThis study comparatively analyzed the COVID-19 vaccine policies and their effects in South Korea, Japan, and Singapore, and found that there is a common set of logical combinations behind the seemingly different strategies of these three countries. Therefore, in the process of combating COVID-19, countries can learn from the successful experience of combating the epidemic and continue to strengthen the implementation of vaccination programs, as well as adjusting public perceptions to reduce the level of vaccine hesitancy, enhance the motivation for vaccination, and improve the coverage of COVID-19 vaccine based on different cultural factors, which remains the direction for future development.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesHumansJapanRepublic of KoreaSingaporeVaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19Effective reproduction rateVaccinationVaccine policies

Identifiers

PMID37864164
PMCPMC10588018
OpenAlexW4387816426

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.