World Medical & Health Policy最新文献

COVID-19 is not the first, nor the last, public health challenge the US political system has faced. Understanding drivers of governmental responses to public health emergencies is important for policy decision-making, planning, health and social outcomes, and advocacy. We use federal political disaster-aid debates to examine political factors related to variations in outcomes for Puerto Rico, Texas, and Florida after the 2017 hurricane season. Despite the comparable need and unprecedented mortality, Puerto Rico received delayed and substantially less aid. We find bipartisan participation in floor debates over aid to Texas and Florida, but primarily Democrat participation for Puerto Rican aid. Yet, deliberation and participation in the debates were strongly influenced by whether a state or district was at risk of natural disasters. Nearly one-third of all states did not participate in any aid debate. States' local disaster risk levels and political parties' attachments to different racial and ethnic groups may help explain Congressional public health disaster response failures. These lessons are of increasing importance in the face of growing collective action problems around the climate crisis and subsequent emergent threats from natural disasters.

As early as two months into the COVID-19 pandemic, popular media started reporting that women leaders, compared to men leaders, were managing COVID-19 better. This paper empirically examines the impact of women leaders in managing pandemic health outcomes one year after the onset of the pandemic. Further, we consider leader effectiveness within the context of country culture. We find that women's leadership is indeed associated with better containment of the pandemic. We also find that certain country-level cultural traits play a significant role in pandemic outcomes. More hierarchical societies experience higher COVID-19 cases and death. Individualistic cultures and masculine cultures are associated with more deaths from the pandemic. Some cultural traits modulate women's ability to manage COVID-19. Our findings have implications for health policy and provide rationale for promoting gender equity in political leadership.

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.

When the COVID-19 virus first arrived in the United States in early 2020, many epidemiologists and public health officers counseled for shutdowns and advised policymakers to prepare for a major pandemic. In 2020, though, US society was rife with major political and cultural divides. Some elected leaders promoted policies at odds with the experts, and many people refused to heed the public health-based communications about the coming pandemic. Additionally, the capacity to respond to a pandemic was distributed in the country in a highly unequal fashion. This paper analyzes the noteworthy geopolitical patterns of COVID-19 illnesses, subsequent demands on hospitals, and resulting deaths. This description is based on a snapshot of archival data gathered in the midst of the pandemic during late January and early February of 2021. Demographic data, indicators of political party support, indicators of citizen attitudes, and public health compliance behaviors are combined in a multivariate analysis to explain COVID-19 outcomes at the local government (county) level. The analysis suggests strongly that regional political culture and local demographics played a substantial role in determining the severity of the public health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.