ArticleInternational health2025
Evaluation of joint external evaluation to COVID-19 and other infectious diseases mortality outcomes in 96 countries.
Article in International health, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluated the effectiveness of Joint External Evaluation (JEE) scores with regard to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and other infectious diseases performance in 96 countries. To propose a revised JEE tool, potential JEE indicators were also examined.
methodsJEE data from 2016-2019 were linked with outcomes such as COVID-19 fatality rates and infections, as well as mortality rates for other infectious diseases. We also examined potential indicators such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Universal Health Coverage index to propose enhancements to the JEE tool. Multiple regression analysis was used to assess these associations.
resultsThe average JEE score was 2.70 (SD=0.92) in 96 countries. Detection capabilities received the highest average score (3.23), while the other areas (2.30) section received the lowest scores. However, the analysis revealed that the JEE tool had limited predictive accuracy for COVID-19 outcomes. By contrast, the JEE scores showed a negative association with the performance of other infectious diseases. Notably, SDGs 2 (zero hunger), 4 (quality education) and 8 (decent work and economic growth) were strongly associated with better COVID-19 outcomes.
conclusionThe JEE scores showed limited predictive value for COVID-19 mortality outcomes in 96 countries. The tool offers insights into health security, but needs revision to better handle future pandemics.
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.