Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

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

Bibliographic Data

ID21879505
AuthorsMatt Boyd (0000-0002-1387-5047, Research Director, Adapt Research Ltd, Reefton, New Zealand, corresponding author), Nick Wilson (0000-0001-5250-9894, University of Otago), Cassidy Nelson (0000-0003-0934-8313, University of Oxford)
Year2020
Volume5
Issue10
Pagese003276
Publication date2020-10-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueBMJ Global Health (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2059-7908 • E-ISSN: 2059-7908
PublisherBMJ (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003276
PMID33106239
OpenAlexW3094113586
LanguageEN
Citations received13
References cited16

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: (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

Environmental health · Health security · Political science · Public health · Computer Science · Data-Driven Disease Surveillance · Medicine · Nursing · Psychology · Viral Infections and Outbreaks Research · Zoonotic diseases and public health

  • Joint External Evaluation scores and communicable disease deaths

    Open Access•Vageesh Jain, Ashley Sharp et al.•PLOS Global Public Health•2022

  • Indicators, security and sovereignty during Covid-19 in the Global South

    Open Access•J Harrington•International Journal of Law in…•2021

  • Reacting, fast and slow

    Open Access•Timon Forster, Mirko Heinzel•Journal of European Public Policy•2021

  • Cultural context and pandemic preparedness

    Open Access•Hyosun Kim, Taejong Kim et al.•Social Science & Medicine•2025

  • Structural gradients in excess mortality during and after the Covid-19 pandemic

    Open Access•Daeil Jang, Sunhwa Choi et al.•Journal of Global Health•2026

  • Associations of diabetes, hypertension and obesity with Covid-19 mortality

    Open Access•Chaoyang Li, Nazrul Islam et al.•BMJ Global Health•2023

  • Analysing Covid-19 outcomes in the context of the 2019 Global Health Security (GHS) Index

    Open Access•S Rose, Sophie M Rose et al.•BMJ Global Health•2021

  • Casualties of preparedness

    Open Access•Manjari Mahajan•International Journal of Law in…•2021

  • Assessing the impact of regional laboratory networks in East and West Africa on national health security capacities

    Open Access•Avery League, Donewell Bangure et al.•PLOS Global Public Health•2023

  • Countries’ progress towards Global Health Security (GHS) increased health systems resilience during the Coronavirus Disease-19 (Covid-19) pandemic

    Open Access•Tyler Y Headley, Sooyoung Kim et al.•PLOS Global Public Health•2025

  • Rethinking the methodology of global indexes for equitable evidence-informed policy towards sustainable development

    Open Access•Kehinde Olawale Ogunyemi, Chima Ohuabunwo et al.•Journal of Global Health•2024

  • Socioeconomic inequality and decomposition of core capacity in global health security

    Open Access•Minmin Wang, Mengze Liu et al.•Journal of Global Health•2025

  • Did the Covid-19 quarantine policies applied in Cochabamba, Bolivia mitigated cases successfully? an interrupted time series analysis

    Open Access•Rodrigo K Arce Cardozo, Osvaldo Fonseca-Rodríguez et al.•Global Health Action•2024

  • The Global Health Security Index

    Open Access•Ahmed Razavi, Ngozi Erondu et al.•BMJ Global Health•2020

  • Are countries’ self-reported assessments of their capacity for infectious disease control reliable? Associations among countries’ self-reported international health regulation 2005 capacity assessments and infectious disease control outcomes

    Open Access•Feng‐Jen Tsai, Mathuros Tipayamongkholgul•BMC Public Health•2020

Unique citing works13
Citations per year2,6
Citation span2021 - 2026 (6)
Citation velocitycurrent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 9
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae