ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
Governance in Crisis: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Global Health Governance During COVID-19.
Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing and Validating a Global Governance Framework for Health: A Delphi Consensus Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- The health diplomacy spiral: a conceptual framework linking health system integration and public health diplomacy.Public health reviews · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic exposed major structural deficiencies in global health governance, including stark inequities in vaccine access, intervention timing, and mortality outcomes. While economic resources played a role, the influence of governance performance remains insufficiently examined. This study addresses a significant gap by integrating governance metrics with pandemic response data to assess how governance quality, independent of income level, affected national outcomes. Although the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) dataset has been widely used to document policy responses, this study offers a novel contribution by linking these policy interventions with governance performance and evaluating their joint effect on health outcomes and vaccine equity.
methodsThis mixed-methods study combines quantitative analysis of global datasets with a qualitative literature review. Quantitative data were mainly obtained from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT), the World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGIs), and World Bank/WHO databases. A governance performance index was constructed using two WGI components: Government Effectiveness and Regulatory Quality. Countries were grouped into high, medium, or low governance categories. Statistical tests included ANOVA, Kaplan Meier survival analysis, and multivariable OLS regression. The qualitative component reviewed 45 academic and institutional sources on governance performance during COVID-19.
resultsCountries with high governance performance had earlier public health interventions, lower mortality, and broader vaccine coverage, independent of income level. Kaplan Meier analysis revealed faster school closures in these countries (
conclusionsGovernance performance had a decisive impact on pandemic outcomes. The COVID-19 crisis revealed the need for robust governance systems capable of responding to complex emergencies that extend beyond the health sector into institutional, economic, and social spheres.
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.