ArticleBMC public health2025
The dynamic preparedness metric: results from a global and regional analysis of health emergency preparedness.
Article in BMC 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has underscored limitations in current methods for assessing country-level health emergency preparedness, which often overlook essential factors like ongoing epidemics, natural disasters, conflicts, or community trust. Addressing this, the World Health Organization (WHO) developed the Dynamic Preparedness Metric (DPM), a composite measure that assesses epidemic risk by accounting for hazards, vulnerabilities, and capacity, offering insights for improving country-level health emergency preparedness.
methodsOur analysis tested the DPM's effectiveness in supporting preparedness at global and WHO-regional levels, focusing on five acute syndromes. The DPM regional average is calculated from individual country scores, and a one-year trend analysis (from the 1st to 4th quarters of 2023) was conducted globally for all syndromes, as well as regionally for diarrhoeal syndrome. Additionally, we back-calculated DPM scores from 2018 to 2021 to explore the metric's responsiveness to the COVID-19 pandemic. Underlying standardized indicators were also analysed to pinpoint primary risk factors.
resultsInitial findings highlight substantial variation across WHO regions. Short-term analyses revealed temporal trends in regional risk, while medium-term analyses showed decreased scores and expanded capacity gaps during COVID-19. Primary risk factors identified include health system deficiencies, urbanization, and the prevalence of epidemic-prone diseases, with considerable regional differences.
conclusionsThese results emphasize the importance of a dynamic, risk-informed approach to health emergency preparedness assessment. Tracking shifts in hazards, vulnerabilities, and capacities enables refinement of health emergency preparedness and readiness planning, fostering more responsive and effective health security strategies.
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.