ArticlePloS one2024
Comparative analysis of state-level policy responses in global health governance: A scoping review using COVID-19 as a case.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStates are key actors in global health governance, particularly in the prevention and control of infectious diseases. The emergence and re-emergence of infectious diseases in recent decades pose profound challenges to global health security. As the first coronavirus pandemic, the COVID-19 caused significant damage worldwide, but responses and outcomes varied greatly among states. Using COVID-19 as an example, this study aims to compare the policies and measures implemented by different states during the COVID-19 pandemic and to synthesize experiences to strengthen global health governance for future infectious disease crises.
methodsWe used Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage scoping review framework and PRISMA methodology was used for literature search and decision on relevant studies. English databases were searched using combinations of keywords and articles examining COVID-19 prevention and control policies in representative countries were included. A comparative analysis across these four states (United States, Sweden, India, and Nigeria) was then conducted to analyse the differences, rationale, and challenges of the approaches taken by these states.
resultsA total of 36 studies were included in the analysis. The management of the COVID-19 by states is divided into two main categories: domestic governance and international governance. Domestically, the United States and India have taken more measures, yet notable disparities in infection source control, transmission interruption, vulnerable population protection, collaborative governance, and so on were observed among all four states. Globally, the United States and Sweden were more proactive in international governance, and all four states have variations in their adherence to global regulations, information sharing, resource distribution, and cooperative engagement.
conclusionsSignificant disparities occurred during the response to early COVID-19 in four states, which may be due to differences in politics, economy, and culture. To prevent and mitigate the impact of infectious diseases, states should, in future, prioritize solidarity and cooperation, and improve governance domestically and internationally based on national contexts and global health principles.
Indexed as
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.