ArticleGlobal health action2025
Analysing the engagement with pandemic preparedness, prevention and response in selected English language political manifestoes in 2024.
Article in Global health action, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the devastating impact of COVID-19 and repeated calls for political commitment to health security, our analysis of 43 manifestos from 16 countries and the European Parliamentary elections revealed that only four parties made specific policy pledges on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, with six providing brief mentions. The vast majority (33 parties) did not mention pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. When referenced, the pandemic was often framed as a rare, one-off crisis or an economic shock rather than a catalyst for systemic health reform. Some parties used it for political critique or validation of past performance, while others framed preparedness in terms of national security or economic resilience rather than public health. In contrast, manifestos overwhelmingly prioritized healthcare system expansion, equity, and access, with a significant emphasis on universal health coverage, mental health, and workforce development. The findings underscore a stark misalignment between global health priorities and domestic political agenda. Political reluctance to emphasize pandemic prevention, preparedness and response appears to be influenced by pandemic fatigue, voter preferences for forward-looking narratives, and institutional incentives favouring short-term tangible outcomes. This persistent neglect of the pandemic in electoral discourse raises concerns about the global community's ability to sustain momentum for pandemic resilience. We call for stronger engagement between the global health community and political actors to elevate pandemic prevention, preparedness and response as a strategic, cross-cutting priority for future policymaking.
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.