Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39295625›Full record

ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2024

Comparison of the Bulut Index-Beta method and Global Health Security Index: results from the world's countries.

Tevfik Bulut, Mehmet Top, Murat Atan, Burkay Genç

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tevfik BulutDepartment of Health Management, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3668-7436
Mehmet TopDepartment of Health Management, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9162-4238
Murat AtanDepartment of Econometrics, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2485-9456
Burkay GençDepartment of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5134-1487

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/aim: The Global Health Security Index (GHSI), which is used to assess the global health security preparedness levels of countries, and the Bulut Index-Beta (BI-β) method, developed as a multicriteria decision-making method, were compared in terms of global health security in the context of the world's countries. It was aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of the BI-β method by testing it on GHSI datasets and contribute to the methodological development of the GHSI. Materials and methods: The datasets used in this study were the publicly available GHSI datasets, which allow for comparative evaluations of countries. The BI-β method and GHSI were used to compare countries in terms of global health security. Results: In 2021, the top three best-performing countries in terms of global health security were the United States (BI-β = 85.46), Australia (BI-β = 82.53), and the United Kingdom (BI-β = 82.29). For 2019, the United States (BI-β = 85.44) and Australia (BI-β = 81.69) had the same ranks as in 2021, but the United Kingdom (BI-β = 76.63) dropped to 9th place. There was a statistically significant positive weak monotonic relationship between BI-β and GHSI rankings. Conclusion: Since the GHSI scoring system is not consistent or questionable, the weighting process needs to be objectively reconsidered and the reasons for the weighting process need to be explained. The GHSI was conceptualized based on a narrow and technical framework. Therefore, it is recommended that the social and political determinants of public health be taken into account in the GHSI. On the other hand, the BI-β method can be easily used in solving other multicriteria decision-making problems, especially in public health areas such as global health security.

Indexed as

Global HealthAustraliaDecision MakingHumansSecurity MeasuresBI-βBulut Index-BetaCOVID-19GHSIGlobal Health Security Indexpandemic

Identifiers

PMID39295625
PMCPMC11407367

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.