ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Toward resilience for public health emergency response system during COVID-19: qualitative comparative analyses of 40 countries.
Article in Frontiers in public 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As a critical defense mechanism against COVID-19, the national public health emergency response system (PHERS) with high resilience enables effective identification, absorption, and resistance of epidemic crises. This resilience is essential for safeguarding public health and rapidly restoring social stability. However, existing studies primarily focus on single-aspect strategies in specific countries, lacking a systematic understanding of how resilience strategies influence PHERS resilience outcomes. Therefore, this study aims to establish evidence-based and configurational resilience strategies to improve the effectiveness of PHERS in responding to epidemic threats. This study proposes a theoretical framework to characterize resilience strategies and resilience outcomes for PHERS. The fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) method is applied to analyze data from 40 countries during the COVID-19 crisis. The findings reveal three configuration paths to enhance robustness and three paths to enhance rapidity. These results emphasize the importance of the synergistic implementation of containment and closures, travel control, public personal protection, and early virus detection in improving PHERS resilience. This study provides a structured approach to understanding PHERS resilience by identifying key configuration paths that enhance robustness and rapidity. The results offer actionable insights for designing resilient PHERS to better respond to future epidemics.
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.