Search

China has been contributing to new approaches to global governance. The Health Silk Road (HSR), a significant component of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), was proposed by China in 2016. This paper claims that HSR is a new institution introduced alongside the existing WHO-led multilateral health system, and its relationship with the existing system can be described as layering. Having explored the new development of HSR during COVID-19, this paper further argues that while HSR has its unique strength in making contributions to global health governance and economic recovery, it faces a prominent issue of securitisation in the context of China-U.S. strategic competition, suspicion of the quality of medical products and sectoral fragmentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After three years of global rampage, the COVID-19 epidemic, the most serious infectious disease to occur worldwide since the 1918 influenza pandemic, is nearing its end. From the global experience, medical control and social control are the two main dimensions in the prevention and control of COVID-19. From the perspective of "two types of control", namely medical control and social control, this paper finds that the political system, economic structure, and cultural values of the United States greatly limit the government's ability to impose social control, forcing it to adopt medical control to fight the virus in a single dimension. In contrast, China's political system, economic structure, and cultural values allow its government to adopt stringent, extensive, and frequent social control, as well as medical control to fight the virus. This approach departs from the traditional pathway of fighting the epidemic, i.e., "infection–treatment–immunization", thereby outpacing the evolution of the virus and controlling its spread more rapidly. This finding helps explain why the Chinese government adopted a strict "zeroing" and "dynamic zeroing" policy during the first three years, at the cost of enormous economic, social, and even political legitimacy. It was not until late 2022, when the Omicron variant with the waning virulence became prevalent, that China chose to "coexist" with the virus, thus avoiding a massive epidemic-related death. While the United States adopted a pulsed-style strategy at the beginning of the epidemic, i.e., "relaxation–suppression–relaxation–suppression", and began to "coexist" with the virus in just one year, resulting in a large number of excess deaths associated with the epidemic. The study contributes to explaining the difference in the interplay between public health priorities and COVID-19 response strategies in China and the United States, based on the specific public health context and the perspective of "medical control" and "social control". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 outbreaks in China in late December 2019, then in the United States (US) in early 2020. In the initial wave of diffusion, the virus respectively took 14 and 33 days to spread across the provinces/states in the Chinese mainland and the coterminous US, during which there are 43% and 70% zero entries in the space-time series for China and US respectively, indicating a zero-inflated count process. A logistic growth curve as a function of the number of days since the first case appeared in each of these countries accurately portrays the national aggregate per capita rates of infection for both. This paper presents two space-time model specifications, one based upon the generalized linear mixed model, and the other upon Moran eigenvector space-time filtering, to describe the spread of COVID-19 in the initial 19 and 58 days across the Chinese mainland and the coterminous US, respectively. Results from these case studies show both models shed new light on the role of spatial structures in COVID-19 diffusion, models that can forecast new cases in subsequent days. A principal finding is that describing the spatio-temporal diffusion of COVID-19 benefits from including a hierarchical structural component to supplement the commonly employed contagion component. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to understand whether a catastrophic and urgent event, such as the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, accelerates or reverses trends in international collaboration, especially in and between China and the United States. A review of research articles produced in the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic shows that COVID-19 research had smaller teams and involved fewer nations than pre-COVID-19 coronavirus research. The United States and China were, and continue to be in the pandemic era, at the center of the global network in coronavirus related research, while developing countries are relatively absent from early research activities in the COVID-19 period. Not only are China and the United States at the center of the global network of coronavirus research, but they strengthen their bilateral research relationship during COVID-19, producing more than 4.9% of all global articles together, in contrast to 3.6% before the pandemic. In addition, in the COVID-19 period, joined by the United Kingdom, China and the United States continued their roles as the largest contributors to, and home to the main funders of, coronavirus related research. These findings suggest that the global COVID-19 pandemic shifted the geographic loci of coronavirus research, as well as the structure of scientific teams, narrowing team membership and favoring elite structures. These findings raise further questions over the decisions that scientists face in the formation of teams to maximize a speed, skill trade-off. Policy implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The outbreak of the COVID-19 in 2020 has a severe impact on all countries. This paper first studies the impact of the epidemic on the macro-economy in China, which is one of the countries with early epidemic situation, in the rapid development stage of the epidemic situation, and the specific performance in macro-economy aspects. On this basis, study the development trend and macroeconomic performance of the United States as one of the most serious countries, and the relationship between the epidemic development and macro-economy in the United States. As for the differences in epidemic control measures between China and the US, China's indicators are significant in terms of sentiment factors, but the impact of COVID-19 on the sentiment factors in the US is different. The Chinese government has not adopted unlimited easing and maintained consistent policies. At present, the economic impact of COVID-19 on the US is far greater than that of China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the outbreak of a disease caused by a pathogen with unknown characteristics, the uncertainty of its progression parameters can be reduced by devising methods that, based on rational assumptions, exploit available information to provide actionable insights. In this study, performed a few (~6) weeks into the outbreak of COVID-19 (caused by SARS-CoV-2), one of the most important disease parameters, the average time-to-recovery, was calculated using data publicly available on the internet (daily reported cases of confirmed infections, deaths, and recoveries), and fed into an algorithm that matches confirmed cases with deaths and recoveries. Unmatched cases were adjusted based on the matched cases calculation. The mean time-to-recovery, calculated from all globally reported cases, was found to be 18.01 days (SD 3.31 days) for the matched cases and 18.29 days (SD 2.73 days) taking into consideration the adjusted unmatched cases as well. The proposed method used limited data and provided experimental results in the same region as clinical studies published several months later. This indicates that the proposed method, combined with expert knowledge and informed calculated assumptions, could provide a meaningful calculated average time-to-recovery figure, which can be used as an evidence-based estimation to support containment and mitigation policy decisions, even at the very early stages of an outbreak. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The broad impact of the COVID-19 on self-reported daily behaviors and health in Chinese and US samples remains unknown. This study aimed to compare physical and mental health between people from the United States (U.S.) and China, and to correlate mental health parameters with variables relating to physical symptoms, knowledge about COVID-19, and precautionary health behaviors. To minimize risk of exposure, respondents were electronically invited by existing study respondents or by data sourcing software and surveys were completed via online survey platforms. Information was collected on demographics, physical symptoms, contact history, knowledge about COVID-19, psychologic parameters (i.e. IES-R; DASS-21), and health behaviors. The study included a total of 1445 respondents (584 U.S.; 861 China). Overall, Americans reported more physical symptoms, contact history, and perceived likelihood of contracting COVID-19. Americans reported more stress and depressive symptoms, while Chinese reported higher acute-traumatic stress symptoms. Differences were identified regarding face mask use and desires for COVID-19 related health information, with differential mental health implications. Physical symptoms that were possibly COVID-19 related were associated with adverse mental health. Overall, American and Chinese participants reported different mental and physical health parameters, health behaviors, precautionary measures, and knowledge of COVID-19; different risk and protective factors were also identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: With the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic across the world, people have suffered an unexpected setback to their mental health. As psychological support is being provided to patients and healthcare workers, the general population and university students go unnoticed. This review aims to present existing literature that reports the effects of COVID-19 on psychological outcomes of the general population and university students in different countries. Methods: A manual search was conducted on PubMed, Google Scholar and Mendeley from inception to 31st January 2021. Articles were selected based on the predetermined eligibility criteria. Results: During COVID-19 pandemic, relatively high rates of depression (4.5% to 72.3%), anxiety (12.7% to 85.7%) and stress (5% to 90.1%) were reported in the general population as well as in university students, depression (3% to 70.5%), anxiety (9% to 63.3%) and stress (61.5% to 25%) in India, Nepal, Pakistan, China, Spain, US, UK, France, Egypt, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia. Risk factors associated include female gender, younger age group (≤40 years), unemployment, student status, and frequent exposure to social media/news concerning COVID-19. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic is associated with highly significant levels of psychological disorders such as depression, anxiety and stress. Alleviating the hazardous effects of COVID-19 on mental health should be given due attention internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]