Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40413485›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

The ongoing impact of policy documents on the pandemic based on the framework of the "4Rs" theory and policy tools: in China.

Lili Wang, Xueying Li, Zhuojun Ye, Shiwen Zhang, Xiaoyu Zhang, Limei Jing

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Lili Wang *School of Public Health, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xueying Li *School of Public Health, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zhuojun Ye *School of Public Health, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Shiwen ZhangSchool of Public Health, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xiaoyu ZhangSchool of Public Health, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Limei JingSchool of Public Health, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China. limei_jing@sjtu.edu.cn.

Funding

National Social Science Fund of China 24BRK020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnhancing public health emergency (PHE) management capacities has become a critical challenge in global public health governance. During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Shanghai and Shenzhen implemented region-specific measures tailored to local conditions, reflecting China's overarching control strategy. Systematically analysis of prevention and control policies is essential for optimizing PHE responses. While existing research has primarily focused on policy-outcome relationships through case studies or quantitative models, the application of policy tools across different pandemic stages remains underexplored.

methodsTo analyze the distribution and evolution of policy tools across pandemic stages, this study integrated the policy tool perspective with the "4Rs" crisis management theory to construct a two-dimensional analytical framework. Quantitative text analysis was employed within this framework to code and quantify pandemic prevention and control policies issued between January 2020 and December 2022. Policy texts were collected from the official websites of local governments and the Peking University Law website.

resultsFrom the perspective of policy tools, both Shanghai and Shenzhen predominantly relied on authority tools, followed by incentive tools, with system-changing tools being the least utilized. From the crisis management dimension, the frequency of policy tool usage peaked during the crisis outbreak period, dropped significantly during the crisis receding period, and slightly rebounded during the crisis recovery period. The two-dimensional analysis revealed that, apart from Shanghai's emphasis on incentive tools during the crisis receding period, authority tools dominated across all crisis management stages in both cities. Additionally, as the pandemic progressed, the use of capacity-building tools and incentive tools increased significantly.

conclusionsChinese local governments primarily applied authority tools to drive institutional improvements, complemented by incentive tools and capacity-building tools to enhance policy effectiveness and public engagement. Optimizing PHE management requires dynamic adjustments to policy tools based on crisis stage characteristics, balancing rigidity with flexibility and immediate responses with long-term system development. The findings may provide valuable references for governments worldwide in formulating follow-up PHE policies and offer a replicable framework for future analyses in this field.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health PolicyPandemicsChinaHumansPublic Health4RsCOVID-19Policy toolsPublic health emergencyQuantitative text analysis

Identifiers

PMID40413485
PMCPMC12102847

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.