Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37948434›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Initial response to SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) outbreak in Sri Lanka; views of public health specialists through an International Health Regulations lens.

Amandhi Caldera, Rajitha Wickremasinghe, Gretchen Newby, Ruwanthi Perera, Kamini Mendis, Deepika Fernando

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Amandhi CalderaDepartment of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Kelaniya, Sri Lanka.ORCID 0000-0002-4151-8469
Rajitha WickremasingheDepartment of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Kelaniya, Sri Lanka.ORCID 0000-0002-6174-6784
Gretchen NewbyMalaria Elimination Initiative, Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Ruwanthi PereraDepartment of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Kelaniya, Sri Lanka.
Kamini MendisDepartment of Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Colombo, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Deepika FernandoDepartment of Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Colombo, Colombo, Sri Lanka.ORCID 0000-0002-2535-9031
University of Kelaniya · LKUniversity of Colombo · LKUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic affected Sri Lanka despite having developed an International Health Regulations (IHR) steering committee in 2016 and a national action plan for health security following the Joint External Evaluation in 2018. Many steps were taken to improve the disaster management skills of healthcare workers even before the COVID-19 outbreak. We interviewed seven public health specialists to obtain their views on the country's response to the pandemic. A thematic analysis was conducted, leading to the emergence of three major themes and seven subthemes. The major themes included health security preparedness; COVID-19 management; and effects of COVID-19. The subthemes were; preparedness prior to pandemic and gaps in the preparedness (under health security preparedness); dual burden for the curative sector, strategies to reduce transmission and barriers to managing COVID-19 (under COVID-19 management) and negative and positive effects of COVID-19 (under effects of COVID-19). When COVID-19 reached Sri Lanka, healthcare workers, border control authorities and those involved with infectious disease control were overwhelmed by the magnitude of the pandemic. Healthcare workers' hesitation to work amidst the pandemic due to fear of infection and possible transmission of infection to their families was a major issue; the demand for personal protective equipment by health workers when stocks were low was also a contributory factor. Lockdowns with curfew and quarantine at government regulated centers were implemented as necessary. Perceptions of the public including permitting healthcare workers to perform field public health services, logistical barriers and lack of human resources were a few of the barriers that were expressed. Some persons did not declare their symptoms, fearing that they would have to be quarantined. The pandemic severely affected the economy and Sri Lanka relied on donations and loans to overcome the situation. Pandemic also brought about innovative methods to maintain and upgrade health service provision. Individuals with non-communicable diseases received their regular medications through the post which reduced their risk of being infected by visiting hospitals. Improvement of laboratory services and quarantine services, a reduction of acute respiratory infections and diarrhoeal diseases, improved intersectoral coordination and public philanthropic response were other positive effects.

Indexed as

COVID-19Communicable Disease ControlDisease OutbreaksHumansInternational Health RegulationsPandemicsPublic HealthSARS-CoV-2Sri Lanka

Identifiers

PMID37948434
PMCPMC10637679
OpenAlexW4388563331

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.