Health Emergency Research Preparedness: An Analysis of National Pre‑COVID Research Activity and COVID Research Output.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Annals of Global Health Pub Date : 2025-06-13 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.5334/aogh.4764
Peter H Kilmarx, Shirley Kyere
{"title":"Health Emergency Research Preparedness: An Analysis of National Pre‑COVID Research Activity and COVID Research Output.","authors":"Peter H Kilmarx, Shirley Kyere","doi":"10.5334/aogh.4764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background:</i> Research capacity is a critical element of health emergency preparedness, but metrics are not readily available for many countries. The COVID‑19 pandemic provided an opportunity to use publicly available data to assess correlations between national pre‑pandemic research activity, pandemic research response, and other national socioeconomic characteristics. <i>Methods:</i> National pre‑pandemic (2018-19) research activity was defined as the average of percentile rankings of (1) the average annual number of health science publications in Scopus and (2) the average annual number of clinical trials in the International Clinical Trials Research Platform (ICTRP). National pandemic research response (2020-21) was defined as the average of percentile rankings of (1) average annual number of COVID‑19‑related publications in Scopus and (2) average annual number of COVID‑19‑related clinical trials in ICTRP. <i>Findings:</i> During 2018-19, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) of national annual average health science publications was 415 (108-3,398) and of clinical trials was 21 (4-273). During 2020-21, the median (IQR) of national annual average COVID‑19‑related publications was 85 (18-798) and that of COVID‑19‑related clinical trials was 1.5 (0-11). National COVID‑19‑related research output was strongly correlated with pre‑pandemic research activity (R‑squared 0.89) and much less correlated with Human Development Index (0.26), COVID‑19 case number (0.16), case rate (0.14), gross domestic product (0.11), or population (0.10). In a multivariable linear regression analysis, national pre‑COVID‑19 research activity was the only factor with substantial or statistically significant contribution to explaining variations in COVID‑19‑related research output. <i>Interpretation:</i> National pandemic research responses were most strongly correlated with pre‑pandemic research activity, much more so than with other country characteristics. These findings strongly support global efforts to strengthen research capacity as a critical element of preparedness for health emergencies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48857,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Global Health","volume":"91 1","pages":"33"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12171802/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4764","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Research capacity is a critical element of health emergency preparedness, but metrics are not readily available for many countries. The COVID‑19 pandemic provided an opportunity to use publicly available data to assess correlations between national pre‑pandemic research activity, pandemic research response, and other national socioeconomic characteristics. Methods: National pre‑pandemic (2018-19) research activity was defined as the average of percentile rankings of (1) the average annual number of health science publications in Scopus and (2) the average annual number of clinical trials in the International Clinical Trials Research Platform (ICTRP). National pandemic research response (2020-21) was defined as the average of percentile rankings of (1) average annual number of COVID‑19‑related publications in Scopus and (2) average annual number of COVID‑19‑related clinical trials in ICTRP. Findings: During 2018-19, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) of national annual average health science publications was 415 (108-3,398) and of clinical trials was 21 (4-273). During 2020-21, the median (IQR) of national annual average COVID‑19‑related publications was 85 (18-798) and that of COVID‑19‑related clinical trials was 1.5 (0-11). National COVID‑19‑related research output was strongly correlated with pre‑pandemic research activity (R‑squared 0.89) and much less correlated with Human Development Index (0.26), COVID‑19 case number (0.16), case rate (0.14), gross domestic product (0.11), or population (0.10). In a multivariable linear regression analysis, national pre‑COVID‑19 research activity was the only factor with substantial or statistically significant contribution to explaining variations in COVID‑19‑related research output. Interpretation: National pandemic research responses were most strongly correlated with pre‑pandemic research activity, much more so than with other country characteristics. These findings strongly support global efforts to strengthen research capacity as a critical element of preparedness for health emergencies.

卫生应急研究准备:国家COVID前研究活动和COVID研究成果分析
背景:研究能力是卫生应急准备的一个关键因素,但许多国家没有现成的衡量标准。COVID - 19大流行为利用公开数据评估国家大流行前研究活动、大流行研究应对措施和其他国家社会经济特征之间的相关性提供了机会。方法:将国家大流行前(2018- 2019年)的研究活动定义为(1)Scopus中卫生科学出版物的平均年数量和(2)国际临床试验研究平台(ICTRP)中临床试验的平均年数量的百分位数排名的平均值。国家大流行研究应对(2020-21)定义为(1)Scopus中与COVID - 19相关的年平均出版物数量和(2)ICTRP中与COVID - 19相关的年平均临床试验数量的百分位数排名的平均值。结果:2018- 2019年,全国年度平均卫生科学出版物的中位数(四分位数间距[IQR])为415篇(108- 3398篇),临床试验的中位数(四分位数间距[IQR])为21篇(4-273篇)。2020- 2021年,全国年度平均COVID - 19相关出版物的中位数(IQR)为85(18-798),与COVID - 19相关的临床试验的中位数(IQR)为1.5(0-11)。国家与COVID - 19相关的研究产出与大流行前的研究活动密切相关(R²0.89),与人类发展指数(0.26)、COVID - 19病例数(0.16)、病例率(0.14)、国内生产总值(0.11)或人口(0.10)的相关性要小得多。在多变量线性回归分析中,国家在COVID - 19之前的研究活动是解释COVID - 19相关研究产出变化的唯一重大或统计显著因素。解释:国家大流行研究对策与大流行前研究活动的相关性最强,远高于与其他国家特征的相关性。这些发现有力地支持了加强研究能力的全球努力,这是应对突发卫生事件的关键要素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of Global Health
Annals of Global Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.40%
发文量
95
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: ANNALS OF GLOBAL HEALTH is a peer-reviewed, open access journal focused on global health. The journal’s mission is to advance and disseminate knowledge of global health. Its goals are improve the health and well-being of all people, advance health equity and promote wise stewardship of the earth’s environment. The journal is published by the Boston College Global Public Health Program. It was founded in 1934 by the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai as the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine. It is a partner journal of the Consortium of Universities for Global Health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信