Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38431647›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2024

The COVID-19 quandemic.

Olivier Rubin, Carina King, Johan von Schreeb, Claudia Morsut, Gyöngyi Kovács, Emmanuel Raju

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Olivier RubinDepartment of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark.
Carina KingDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. carina.king@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0002-6885-6716
Johan von SchreebDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Claudia MorsutDepartment of Safety, Economics and Planning, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway.
Gyöngyi KovácsHUMLOG Institute, Hanken School of Economics, Helsinki, Finland.
Emmanuel RajuGlobal Health Section and The Copenhagen Centre for Disaster Research, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe terms syndemic and infodemic have both been applied to the COVID-19 pandemic, and emphasize concurrent socio-cultural dynamics that are distinct from the epidemiological outbreak itself. We argue that the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed yet another important socio-political dynamic that can best be captured by the concept of a quandemic - a portmanteau of "quantification" and "pandemic". MAIN TEXT: The use of quantifiable metrics in policymaking and evaluation has increased throughout the last decades, and is driven by a synergetic relationship between increases in supply and advances in demand for data. In most regards this is a welcome development. However, a quandemic, refers to a situation where a small subset of quantifiable metrics dominate policymaking and the public debate, at the expense of more nuanced and multi-disciplinary discourse. We therefore pose that a quandemic reduces a complex pandemic to a few metrics that present an overly simplified picture. During COVID-19, these metrics were different iterations of case numbers, deaths, hospitalizations, diagnostic tests, bed occupancy rates, the R-number and vaccination coverage. These limited metrics came to constitute the internationally recognized benchmarks for effective pandemic management. Based on experience from the Nordic region, we propose four distinct dynamics that characterize a quandemic: 1) A limited number of metrics tend to dominate both political, expert, and public spheres and exhibit a great deal of rigidity over time. 2) These few metrics crowd-out other forms of evidence relevant to pandemic response. 3) The metrics tend to favour certain outcomes of pandemic management, such as reducing hospitalization rates, while not capturing potential adverse effects such as social isolation and loneliness. 4) Finally, the metrics are easily standardized across countries, and give rise to competitive dynamics based on international comparisons and benchmarking.

conclusionA quandemic is not inevitable. While metrics are an indispensable part of evidence-informed policymaking, being attentive to quandemic dynamics also means identifying relevant evidence that might not be captured by these few but dominant metrics. Pandemic responses need to account for and consider multilayered vulnerabilities and risks, including socioeconomic inequities and comorbidities.

Indexed as

COVID-19ComorbidityDisease OutbreaksHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19InformationNordic regionQuantification

Identifiers

PMID38431647
PMCPMC10908106

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.