Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 16, 2025

Author Spotlight: Advancements in Multiplex Detection of Respiratory Viruses
Published on: November 10, 2023
Does it matter that standard preparedness indices did not predict COVID-19 outcomes?
Michael A Stoto1, Christopher D Nelson2, John D Kraemer3
1Department of Health Management and Policy, School of Health, Georgetown University, Washington DC, USA. stotom@georgetown.edu.
Abstract:
A number of scientific publications and commentaries have suggested that standard preparedness indices such as the Global Health Security Index (GHSI) and Joint External Evaluation (JEE) scores did not predict COVID-19 outcomes. To some, the failure of these metrics to be predictive demonstrates the need for a fundamental reassessment which better aligns preparedness measurement with operational capacities in real-world stress situations, including the points at which coordination structures and decision-making may fail. There are, however, several reasons why these instruments should not be so easily rejected as preparedness measures.From a methodological point of view, these studies use relatively simple outcome measures, mostly based on cumulative numbers of cases and deaths at a fixed point of time. A country's "success" in dealing with the pandemic is highly multidimensional - both in the health outcomes and type and timing of interventions and policies - is too complex to represent with a single number. In addition, the comparability of mortality data over time and among jurisdictions is questionable due to highly variable completeness and representativeness. Furthermore, the analyses use a cross-sectional design, which is poorly suited for evaluating the impact of interventions, especially for COVID-19.Conceptually, a major reason that current preparedness measures fail to predict pandemic outcomes is that they do not adequately capture variations in the presence of effective political leadership needed to activate and implement existing system, instill confidence in the government's response; or background levels of interpersonal trust and trust in government institutions and country ability needed to mount fast and adaptable responses. These factors are crucial; capacity alone is insufficient if that capacity is not effectively leveraged. However, preparedness metrics are intended to identify gaps that countries must fill. As important as effective political leadership and trust in institutions, countries cannot be held accountable to one another for having good political leadership or trust in institutions. Therefore, JEE scores, the GHSI, and similar metrics can be useful tools for identifying critical gaps in capacities and capabilities that are necessary but not sufficient for an effective pandemic response.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Steps in Outbreak Investigation
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
Sensitivity is the...
Factors Affecting the Risk of Infection
The integrity and count of the white blood cells help the body resist pathogens and fight infection. When impaired, it reduces the body's resistance to pathogens. The acidic pH levels of the gastrointestinal, genitourinary tracts, and skin...
Preparedness and Phobias
Standard Precaution
Hand hygiene is the most crucial means to prevent the transmission of disease. Employers are legally required to provide their workers with personal protective equipment (PPE) to minimize exposure or contact with...
Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...

