Abstract
Abstract
International comparisons of the effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) based on national case and mortality data are fraught with underestimated complexity. This article calls for stronger attention to just how extensive is the multifactorial nature of national case and mortality data, and argues that, unless a globally consistent benchmark of measurement can be devised, such comparisons are facile, if not misleading. This can lead to policy decisions and public support for the adoption of potentially harmful NPIs that are ineffective in combating the COVID-19 pandemic and damaging to mental health, social cohesion, human rights and economic development. The unscientific use of international comparisons of case and mortality data in public discourse, media reporting and policymaking on NPI effectiveness should be subject to greater scrutiny.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,General Social Sciences
Reference41 articles.
1. Effect of changing case definitions for COVID-19 on the epidemic curve and transmission parameters in mainland China: a modelling study
2. Informational Autocrats
3. UK Government (2021b) Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK: Deaths in United Kingdom. Published online 17th March 2021. URL: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths.
4. World Health Organization (2021a) Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Published online 1st September 2021. URL: https://covid19.who.int/region/searo/country/kp
5. Buyer beware: inflated claims of sensitivity for rapid COVID-19 tests
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献