Articlenpj health systems2026
Macroeconomic shock-response functions of health system resilience and equity: a global simulation study.
Article in npj health systems, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To quantify how macroeconomic shocks propagate into health system resilience and equity, we develop a globally comparable stress-testing framework isolating within-country responses to standardised shocks. Using a panel of 205 countries (2000-2022; 3,009 observations) with harmonised World Bank data, we construct three indices: Economic Shock, Health System Resilience and Health Equity. Symmetric ±5%, ±10% and ±20% shocks generate counterfactual scenarios, with responses estimated via simulation and validated using linear elasticity, Random Forest and XGBoost. Macroeconomic shocks produce predictable, monotonic shifts in the Economic Shock Index with limited cross-country dispersion, ensuring clean variation. Adverse shocks lead to statistically significant declines in both resilience and equity, with all 95% confidence intervals excluding zero. A -20% shock reduces resilience by 0.059 (95% CI: -0.060 to -0.059) and equity by 0.050 (95% CI: -0.051 to -0.050), while a + 20% shock increases resilience by 0.037 and equity by 0.032. Negative shocks generate approximately 60% larger absolute effects than positive shocks. Machine-learning results show near-linear responses under moderate shocks and bounded nonlinearities in severe downturns. Equity responds more strongly than resilience, indicating financial protection as the most vulnerable margin. Findings support protecting pooled financing and highlight simulation-based stress testing for anticipatory health policy.
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.