ReviewCureus2025
Establishing a Preparedness Program: Lessons From COVID-19 to Strengthen Global Strategies for Future Pandemics.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic, identify preparedness gaps, and propose strategies to strengthen resilience for future health crises, drawing on the natural history of SARS-CoV-2 and epidemiological models. The research team conducted a narrative review with a descriptive analysis supported by case examples and modeling. We synthesized published literature, official reports, and surveillance data, analyzing COVID-19 transmission using the epidemiological triangle model. Comparative case studies from South Korea, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom were examined to assess intervention effectiveness. National surveillance systems, outbreak response mechanisms, and public communication strategies were critically reviewed. Our findings show that disparities in testing, data transparency, and infrastructure shaped outcomes globally. Surprisingly, many high-income countries underperformed despite prior preparedness rankings. Countries implementing early lockdowns, equitable vaccine rollouts, and consistent public messaging achieved better control. However, asymptomatic transmission, weak surveillance integration, and delayed policy actions hindered containment. Vaccine inequity and fragmented data systems further limited coordinated response. Future preparedness must emphasize early interventions, sustained surveillance investment, transparent communication, and equitable access to care. Lessons from COVID-19 underscore the value of multidisciplinary response teams, international data sharing, and targeted testing strategies to mitigate the impact of future pandemics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.