Suppr超能文献

为何《国际卫生条例》自我评估能力(SPAR)得分无法预测新冠疫情防控成果?——2021年SPAR得分与新冠疫情应对能力得分之间的关系分析

Why do International Health Regulations self-assessment capacities (SPAR) scores not predict COVID-19 control outcomes? - analysis of the relationship between SPAR scores and COVID-19 resilience scores in 2021.

作者信息

Satria Fauzi Budi, Tsai Feng-Jen

机构信息

Philosophy Doctor in Medicine Program, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia.

Department of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia.

出版信息

Global Health. 2025 Apr 15;21(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s12992-025-01111-w.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study analyses the relationship between SPAR and the COVID-19 resilience score (CRS) in 80 countries in 2021 to achieve its objective.

METHODS

We adopted the concept of Bloomberg's COVID Resilience Ranking to form the CRS, which encompasses three indicators: Reopening Status, COVID Status, and Quality of Life. The average scores of 13 SPAR capacities focused on infectious disease control in 2021 were calculated. Paired t-tests were applied to evaluate the significance of monthly changes in countries' CRSs. Then, we conducted univariate and multivariate linear regressions to examine the relationship between the SPAR and CRS scores and each CRS indicator.

RESULTS

The CRS in 80 countries fluctuated throughout 2021. Linear regression revealed a significant relationship between countries' SPAR scores and CRS (B = 0.03, 95% CI = 0.001, 0.06). Among the CRS indicators, the SPAR was significantly associated with only the Quality of Life indicator (B = 0.01, 95% CI = 0.002, 1.52) and not the Reopening Status and COVID Status indicators. An increase in SPAR score, along with an increase in Governmental Effectiveness, was associated with increased CRS (Adjusted R = 0.52, p < 0.05). Moreover, an increase in countries' SPAR scores was significantly linked to an improvement in people's Quality of Life (Adjusted R = 0.37, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The significant relationship between the SPAR and COVID Resilience Scores, particularly the Quality of Life indicator indicates that the lack of accuracy in the ability of the SPAR score to predict COVID-19 control outcomes is attributed to the reliance of the measurement solely on the disease perspective and the limited inclusion of social aspects in the SPAR capacity assessments.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

Not Applicable.

摘要

引言

本研究分析了2021年80个国家中标准化公共卫生应对能力(SPAR)与新冠疫情恢复力评分(CRS)之间的关系,以实现其研究目的。

方法

我们采用彭博社新冠疫情恢复力排名的概念来形成CRS,该评分包含三个指标:重新开放状态、新冠疫情状况和生活质量。计算了2021年专注于传染病控制的13项SPAR能力的平均得分。应用配对t检验来评估各国CRS月度变化的显著性。然后,我们进行了单变量和多变量线性回归,以检验SPAR与CRS评分以及每个CRS指标之间的关系。

结果

2021年80个国家的CRS波动较大。线性回归显示各国的SPAR评分与CRS之间存在显著关系(B = 0.03,95%置信区间 = 0.001,0.06)。在CRS指标中,SPAR仅与生活质量指标显著相关(B = 0.01,95%置信区间 = 0.002,1.52),与重新开放状态和新冠疫情状况指标无关。SPAR评分的增加以及政府效能的提高与CRS的增加相关(调整后R = 0.52,p < 0.05)。此外,各国SPAR评分的增加与人们生活质量的改善显著相关(调整后R = 0.37,p < 0.05)。

结论

SPAR与新冠疫情恢复力评分之间的显著关系,特别是与生活质量指标的关系表明,SPAR评分预测新冠疫情控制结果的能力缺乏准确性,这归因于该测量仅从疾病角度出发,且在SPAR能力评估中对社会方面的纳入有限。

临床试验编号

不适用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7aac/12001693/8c464b065621/12992_2025_1111_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

3
Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jan 30;1(1):CD006207. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6.
4
The effect of sample site and collection procedure on identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Dec 16;12(12):CD014780. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014780.
6
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4.
7
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 22;12(12):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub2.
8
Does Resilience Change in Patients Undergoing Shoulder Surgery? A Retrospective Comparative Study Utilizing the Brief Resilience Scale.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Jun 1;483(6):1049-1059. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003368. Epub 2025 Jan 21.
9
Personalised care planning for adults with chronic or long-term health conditions.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Mar 3;2015(3):CD010523. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010523.pub2.
10
Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Mar 25;3(3):CD000259. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000259.pub4.

本文引用的文献

1
Does it matter that standard preparedness indices did not predict COVID-19 outcomes?
Global Health. 2023 Sep 23;19(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s12992-023-00973-2.
4
Analyzing the GHSI puzzle of whether highly developed countries fared worse in COVID-19.
Sci Rep. 2022 Oct 21;12(1):17711. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-22578-2.
7
COVID-19 behavioral health and quality of life.
Sci Rep. 2022 Jan 19;12(1):961. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-05042-z.
8
COVID-19 data are messy: analytic methods for rigorous impact analyses with imperfect data.
Global Health. 2022 Jan 6;18(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s12992-021-00795-0.
9
Governance structure affects transboundary disease management under alternative objectives.
BMC Public Health. 2021 Oct 2;21(1):1782. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11797-3.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验