Global Health Security Capacity Against COVID-19 Outbreak: An Analysis of Annual Data from 210 Countries and Territories

  1. Elham Maraghi
  2. Amal Saki Malehi
  3. Fakher Rahim

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objectives: To review the most recent GHS index annual report to observe the regional and global level of health security against the COVID-19 outbreak, as well as their relationship with the case fatality rate, among 210 countries and territories worldwide. Methods: We analyzed October 2019 GHS index, to assess the capacity of health security-based on the GHS index in the context of six categories. We prioritized not only the capacities of 210 countries and territories around the world using the GHS index but also the existence of functional capabilities to prevent pandemics at the source. Data were collected from global databases, including Worldometer, WHO, and Disease Control and Prevention Center (CDC). Results: This study collected data on 210 countries and territories, of which up to April 14, 2020, 72 countries (34.28%) with more than 1,000 total COVID-19 cases were present. In the most prepared group, the number of total COVID-19 diagnostic tests had a significant positive relationship with the GHS index (r = 0.713; P = 0.006). Case fatality rate was directly associated with the detection index (r = 0.304; P = 0.023) in more prepared group”. In the Lower-middle-income economies group, the case fatality rate was positively related to detection, response, and risk environment indices. Conclusions: With the exception of a very small number, countries that were ranked as most prepared countries were more likely to be affected by the COVID-19 outbreak of the virus and its health consequences and needed to seriously reconsider their capabilities and health security in the context of detection, prevention, rapid response, health system facilities, and risk environment against disease outbreak.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.5812/jjhs.110814
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.25.20079186: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Graphs were made in Excel 2013 and SPSS22
    Excel
    suggested: None
    IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0.
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)
    Correlation and regression analyses were performed using the statistical software Stata, Version 12 (StataCorp. 2011. Stata Statistical Software:
    StataCorp
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.04.25.20079186v1 on medRxiv