ReviewHealth policy OPEN2025
The influence of public health organization on response to the COVID-19 pandemic in four Canadian provinces: A comparative qualitative analysis.
Review in Health policy OPEN, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Formal and informal science-policy interaction during public health emergencies of international concern: a scoping review.BMC global and public health · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Studies of COVID-19 pandemic responses reveal shortcomings that may relate to the organization of public health systems. Objective: This study uncovers the organizational factors that may strengthen pandemic responses in high-income countries through a comparative analysis of four Canadian provinces. Methods: We undertook a qualitative multiple case study, collecting data through document review and 103 interviews with government and non-governmental actors involved in pandemic response. Analysis explored how differences in the organization of provincial public health systems influenced decision-making, advisory, coordination and adaptation processes. Results: The scale of the pandemic positioned the Premier as legitimate decision-maker in all provinces regardless of the distribution of authority in their public health systems. Capacity for generating public health advice was increased through existing or new organizations and highlighted the advantage of links to university expertise. All public health systems relied on healthcare resources for testing programs despite differences in the integration of public health under healthcare governance structures; centralization of healthcare governance was a facilitator. Adapting pandemic control measures to population needs was supported by linkages between organizations capable of apprehending needs and organizations that made decisions. Conclusions: This study builds on the literature of pandemic responses across high-income countries and uncovers organizational factors that may enhance agility to rapidly expand capacities, connect actors for emergency responses, and strengthen public health systems.
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.