Sweden's coronavirus strategy: The Public Health Agency and the sites of controversy.

IF 1.7 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH World Medical & Health Policy Pub Date : 2022-09-01 Epub Date: 2021-06-03 DOI:10.1002/wmh3.449
Arash Heydarian Pashakhanlou
{"title":"Sweden's coronavirus strategy: The Public Health Agency and the sites of controversy.","authors":"Arash Heydarian Pashakhanlou","doi":"10.1002/wmh3.449","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In contrast to the vast majority of Western countries, Sweden left large segments of the society open instead of imposing a lockdown to combat the spread of the coronavirus. As a result, the Swedish COVID-19 measures, largely devised by its expert agency on health, garnered widespread international attention. Despite the global interest in the corona strategy of the Public Health Agency of Sweden (PHAS), there are currently no systematic studies on their COVID-19 policy. The present investigation focuses on the controversies that have characterized PHAS' work with reference to risk assessments, facemasks, voluntarism, testing, and the protection of the elderly during the pandemic. Overall, this inquiry demonstrates that PHAS' risk assessments were initially overly optimistic and their facemask recommendations in conflict with large segments of the scientific community for an extensive period. Yet, their voluntary measures worked moderately well. In their testing, PHAS did not manage to deliver on their promises in time, whereas several measures implemented to protect the elderly were deemed inadequate and late.</p>","PeriodicalId":44943,"journal":{"name":"World Medical & Health Policy","volume":"14 3","pages":"507-527"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/wmh3.449","citationCount":"24","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Medical & Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wmh3.449","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/6/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

Abstract

In contrast to the vast majority of Western countries, Sweden left large segments of the society open instead of imposing a lockdown to combat the spread of the coronavirus. As a result, the Swedish COVID-19 measures, largely devised by its expert agency on health, garnered widespread international attention. Despite the global interest in the corona strategy of the Public Health Agency of Sweden (PHAS), there are currently no systematic studies on their COVID-19 policy. The present investigation focuses on the controversies that have characterized PHAS' work with reference to risk assessments, facemasks, voluntarism, testing, and the protection of the elderly during the pandemic. Overall, this inquiry demonstrates that PHAS' risk assessments were initially overly optimistic and their facemask recommendations in conflict with large segments of the scientific community for an extensive period. Yet, their voluntary measures worked moderately well. In their testing, PHAS did not manage to deliver on their promises in time, whereas several measures implemented to protect the elderly were deemed inadequate and late.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
瑞典的冠状病毒战略:公共卫生机构和争议地点。
与绝大多数西方国家不同,瑞典没有实施封锁,而是开放了大部分社会领域,以对抗冠状病毒的传播。因此,瑞典的COVID-19措施主要由其卫生专家机构设计,引起了广泛的国际关注。尽管全球对瑞典公共卫生署(PHAS)的冠状病毒战略很感兴趣,但目前还没有对其COVID-19政策进行系统研究。目前的调查侧重于pha在大流行期间的风险评估、口罩、自愿性、检测和老年人保护方面的工作所具有的争议。总的来说,这项调查表明,pha的风险评估最初过于乐观,他们的口罩建议在很长一段时间内与科学界的大部分人存在冲突。然而,他们自愿采取的措施效果还算不错。在他们的测试中,pha并没有及时兑现他们的承诺,而一些保护老年人的措施被认为是不充分和迟到的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Medical & Health Policy
World Medical & Health Policy PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
7.30%
发文量
65
期刊最新文献
Exploring critical factors in referral systems at different health‐care levels Mapping out a direction: India's G20 presidency propels global promotion of traditional medicine Rethinking and advancing the movement of resistance, activism, and advocacy in health in four central arenas of the Middle East Region “Patriarchy permeating health policymaking”: Influence of gender on involvement in health policymaking from nurse leaders' perspective Breast cancer screening and early detection programs in Iran: A health policy analysis and recommendations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1