ArticleOsong public health and research perspectives2026
Crisis-driven innovation in the Republic of Korea's in vitro diagnostics industry: a pandemic case study.
Article in Osong public health and research perspectives, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluated the effectiveness of government epidemic control policies centered on diagnostic testing and examined their impact on the in vitro diagnostics (IVD) industry. It also analyzed the complex interplay among policy interventions, epidemic dynamics, and the IVD industry's value chain to identify key leverage points for managing future public health crises.
methodsA system dynamics (SD) model calibrated using national data from the Republic of Korea simulated the interactions between epidemic progression and the IVD value chain. We conducted a scenario analysis encompassing 6 policy interventions: research and development (R&D) investment, public-private collaboration, regulatory easing, diagnostic test performance, testing intensity, and social distancing.
resultsPolicies promoting investment, public-private collaboration, and regulatory easing accelerated the market entry of diagnostics, thereby reducing infections and deaths. However, these interventions were associated with lower overall industry revenue, attributable to increased market competition and a reduced patient population. A critical trade-off was noted: although regulatory speed is advantageous, using low-sensitivity diagnostics substantially worsened public health outcomes. Aggressive testing strategies and stringent social distancing were also confirmed to be effective in reducing both infections and mortality.
conclusionThis study provides a strategic framework for understanding interactions between pandemic control policies and the IVD industry. Sustained pre-crisis investment in R&D, public-private networks, and public health infrastructure is essential for effective pandemic preparedness. During a crisis, policymakers must carefully manage the critical trade-off between regulatory speed and diagnostic quality to ensure that rapid responses do not compromise public health outcomes.
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.