Prasiska Danik Iga, Osei Kennedy Mensah, Chapagain Durga Datta, Rajaguru Vasuki, Kim Tae Hyun, Kang Sun Joo, Lee Sang Gyu, Jang Suk-Yong, Han Whiejong
Global Health Security, Graduate School of Public Health, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea.
Healthcare Management, Graduate School of Public Health, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea.
Ann Glob Health. 2025 Mar 14;91(1):15. doi: 10.5334/aogh.4625. eCollection 2025.
Following the introduction of the Global Health Security Index (GHSI), the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‑19) pandemic emerged as an unprecedented global health crisis, underscoring the need for robust health security frameworks and preparedness measures. This study conducts a scoping review to analyze the existing literature on the GHSI and assess national COVID‑19 responses across different countries. A comprehensive search of electronic databases (EBSCO, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) was conducted for articles published from 2020 to 2024. Search terms included "Global Health Security Index" and terms related to COVID‑19. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‑analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA‑ScR) guidelines. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), adjusted for cross‑sectional studies, was used for quality assessment. A total of 3,243 studies were identified, of which 20 were finalized for data synthesis. Specific COVID‑19 parameters were analyzed to provide a comprehensive overview of each country's pandemic response capacity. Among the selected studies, 17 (85%) had a low risk of bias, while 3 (15%) had a medium risk. Countries' response capacities were categorized into five key parameters: detection, mortality, transmission, fatality, and recovery. Findings revealed significant discrepancies between GHSI scores and actual national responses, with some high‑scoring countries struggling to control the pandemic. This raises concerns about the GHSI's predictive reliability. The study highlights that the GHSI does not fully capture a country's capacity to respond effectively to COVID‑19. However, it remains a valuable tool for identifying gaps in pandemic preparedness. To enhance its relevance, the index should integrate a wider range of factors, including political leadership, governance, public health infrastructure, and socio‑cultural elements, which are crucial in managing public health emergencies.
在全球卫生安全指数（GHSI）推出之后，2019年冠状病毒病（COVID-19）大流行成为一场前所未有的全球卫生危机，凸显了强大的卫生安全框架和防范措施的必要性。本研究进行了一项范围综述，以分析关于GHSI的现有文献，并评估不同国家对COVID-19的应对情况。对电子数据库（EBSCO、EMBASE、PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science）进行了全面检索，以查找2020年至2024年发表的文章。检索词包括“全球卫生安全指数”以及与COVID-19相关的词汇。该研究遵循了系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目：范围综述（PRISMA-ScR）指南。针对横断面研究进行调整的纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表（NOS）用于质量评估。共识别出3243项研究,其中20项最终用于数据综合。分析了特定的COVID-19参数，以全面概述每个国家的疫情应对能力。在所选研究中，17项（85%）偏倚风险较低，而3项（15%）偏倚风险中等。各国的应对能力分为五个关键参数：检测、死亡率、传播、病死率和康复。研究结果显示，GHSI得分与各国实际应对情况之间存在显著差异，一些得分高的国家难以控制疫情。这引发了对GHSI预测可靠性的担忧。该研究强调，GHSI不能完全反映一个国家有效应对COVID-19的能力。然而，它仍然是识别疫情防范差距的宝贵工具。为了提高其相关性，该指数应纳入更广泛的因素，包括政治领导力、治理、公共卫生基础设施和社会文化因素，这些因素在应对突发公共卫生事件中至关重要。
