Validation analysis of Global Health Security Index (GHSI) scores 2019

被引:27
|
作者
Boyd, Matthew J. [1 ]
Wilson, Nick [2 ]
Nelson, Cassidy [3 ]
机构
[1] Adapt Res Ltd, Reefton, New Zealand
[2] Univ Otago, Publ Hlth, Wellington, New Zealand
[3] Univ Oxford, Future Humanity Inst, Oxford, England
来源
BMJ GLOBAL HEALTH | 2020年 / 5卷 / 10期
关键词
health policy; public health; prevention strategies; control strategies; SARS;
D O I
10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003276
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic powerfully demonstrates the consequences of biothreats. Countries will want to know how to better prepare for future events. The Global Health Security Index (GHSI) is a broad, independent assessment of 195 countries' preparedness for biothreats that may aid this endeavour. However, to be useful, the GHSI's external validity must be demonstrated. We aimed to validate the GHSI against a range of external metrics to assess how it could be utilised by countries. Methods Global aggregate communicable disease outcomes were correlated with GHSI scores and linear regression models were examined to determine associations while controlling for a number of global macroindices. GHSI scores for countries previously exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome and Ebola and recipients of US Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) investment were compared with matched control countries. Possible content omissions in light of the progressing COVID-19 pandemic were assessed. Results GHSI scores for countries had strong criterion validity against the Joint External Evaluation ReadyScore (rho=0.82, p<0.0001), and moderate external validity against deaths from communicable diseases (-0.56, p<0.0001). GHSI scores were associated with reduced deaths from communicable diseases (F(3, 172)=22.75, p<0.0001). The proportion of deaths from communicable diseases decreased 4.8% per 10-point rise in GHSI. Recipient countries of the GHSA (n=31) and SARS-affected countries (n=26), had GHSI scores 6.0 (p=0.0011) and 8.2 (p=0.0010) points higher than matched controls, respectively. Biosecurity and biosafety appear weak globally including in high-income countries, and health systems, particularly in Africa, are not prepared. Notably, the GHSI does not account for all factors important for health security. Conclusion The GHSI shows promise as a valid tool to guide action on biosafety, biosecurity and systems preparedness. However, countries need to look beyond existing metrics to other factors moderating the impact of future pandemics and other biothreats. Consideration of anthropogenic and large catastrophic scenarios is also needed.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The 2019 Global Health Security Index (GHSI) and its implications for New Zealand and Pacific regional health security
    Boyd, Matt
    Baker, Michael G.
    Nelson, Cassidy
    Wilson, Nick
    [J]. NEW ZEALAND MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2020, 133 (1516) : 83 - 92
  • [2] Rethinking pandemic preparation: Global Health Security Index (GHSI) is predictive of COVID-19 burden, but in the opposite direction
    Aitken, Tess
    Chin, Ken Lee
    Liew, Danny
    Ofori-Asenso, Richard
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INFECTION, 2020, 81 (02) : 353 - 355
  • [3] Analysing COVID-19 outcomes in the context of the 2019 Global Health Security (GHS) Index
    Rose, Sophie M.
    Paterra, Michael
    Isaac, Christopher
    Bell, Jessica
    Stucke, Amanda
    Hagens, Arnold
    Tyrrell, Sarah
    Guterbock, Michael
    Nuzzo, Jennifer B.
    [J]. BMJ GLOBAL HEALTH, 2021, 6 (12):
  • [4] The value proposition of the Global Health Security Index
    Ravi, Sanjana J.
    Warmbrod, Kelsey Lane
    Mullen, Lucia
    Meyer, Diane
    Cameron, Elizabeth
    Bell, Jessica
    Bapat, Priya
    Paterra, Michael
    Machalaba, Catherine
    Nath, Indira
    Gostin, Lawrence O.
    James, Wilmot
    George, Dylan
    Nikkari, Simo
    Gozzer, Ernesto
    Tomori, Oyewale
    Makumbi, Issa
    Nuzzo, Jennifer B.
    [J]. BMJ GLOBAL HEALTH, 2020, 5 (10):
  • [5] The Sydney Statement 2019: normalising global health security online
    Phillips, Christine B.
    Patel, Mahomed Said
    McLinton, Elizabeh
    Sutarsa, Nyoman I.
    Campbell, Lachlan
    [J]. LANCET, 2020, 395 (10217): : 28 - 29
  • [6] The Global Health Security Index: what value does it add?
    Razavi, Ahmed
    Erondu, Ngozi A.
    Okereke, Ebere
    [J]. BMJ GLOBAL HEALTH, 2020, 5 (04):
  • [7] Casualties of preparedness: the Global Health Security Index and COVID-19
    Mahajan, Manjari
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LAW IN CONTEXT, 2021, 17 (02) : 204 - 214
  • [8] Validation of a prediction model to estimate Health Utilities Index Mark 3 utility scores from WOMAC index scores in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip
    Marshall, Deborah
    Pericak, Dan
    Grootendorst, Paul
    Gooch, Katherine
    Faris, Peter
    Frank, Cy
    Bellamy, Nicholas
    Torrance, George
    Feeny, David
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2008, 11 (03) : 470 - 477
  • [9] Validation of disability categories derived from Health Utilities Index Mark 3 scores
    Feng, Yan
    Bernier, Julie
    McIntosh, Cameron
    Orpana, Heather
    [J]. HEALTH REPORTS, 2009, 20 (02)
  • [10] From global health security to global health solidarity, security and sustainability
    Flahault, Antoine
    Wernli, Didier
    Zylberman, Patrick
    Tanner, Marcel
    [J]. BULLETIN OF THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, 2016, 94 (12) : 863 - 863