ArticlePLOS global public health2026
Governance, coordination, and accountability in public health emergency preparedness and response: A scoping review.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Public health emergency preparedness depends not only on technical capacity but also on strong governance, coordinated multisector action, and clear accountability. However, evidence on how these systems function across different contexts remains fragmented. This scoping review synthesized global evidence on governance structures, coordination mechanisms, and accountability frameworks in public health emergency preparedness and response. Peer-reviewed and grey literature published between 2000 and 2025 was systematically searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and CINAHL, as well as organizational and institutional websites. Eligible sources addressing governance, coordination, or accountability were charted and thematically analyzed to map institutional arrangements, coordination practices, and accountability systems. Seventy-seven sources met the inclusion criteria, comprising 67 primary studies and 10 grey-literature documents. Most studies were published after 2010, with strong representation from global, Asian, and African contexts. The evidence included conceptual and theoretical work, empirical studies, reviews and framework analyses, and policy-oriented guidance. Four interlinked themes emerged: governance architecture, legal foundations, and the distribution of authority, including centralized and decentralized arrangements; institutional roles and coordination mechanisms; accountability failures and system fragmentation; and reform approaches and enabling conditions. Clear legal mandates, functional intersectoral coordination bodies, and routine performance reviews were reported alongside stronger preparedness, whereas weak accountability, overlapping mandates, fragmented information systems, and political inertia were reported alongside delayed and poorly coordinated responses. Effective public health emergency preparedness was described in the literature less in relation to resources alone than to the strength and integration of governance, coordination, and accountability systems. Stronger preparedness was reported alongside adaptive governance, institutionalized multisector coordination, transparent oversight, and continuous learning embedded in policy and practice.
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.