Social vulnerability indicators in pandemics focusing on COVID‐19: A systematic literature review

Abstract

Introduction Social factors can affect the vulnerability of disaster‐prone communities. This review aimed to identify and categorize social vulnerability indicators in the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods This systematic review was conducted in February 2021. Bibliographies, citation databases, and other available records were investigated based on the aim of the study. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools were applied for assessing the included articles retrieved through the comprehensive and systematic literature search. Descriptive and thematic analyses were done to extract the indicators affecting social vulnerability in the COVID‐19 pandemic. Results Thirty‐one eligible articles were included and 85 indicators of social vulnerability were extracted. The indicators were categorized in seven main categories, including; Household, community composition; Race, minority status and language; Socioeconomic status; Community health status; Public health infra‐structures; Education; Information, technology and communication. Conclusion Regions with higher social vulnerability experienced greater mortality rates during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Additional research is needed to measure the social vulnerability index in pandemics to prioritize distribution of scarce resources and ensure effectiveness and equity for all regions of countries.

Spatial Syndromic Surveillance and COVID-19 in the U.S.: Local Cluster Mapping for Pandemic Preparedness

“…These dashboard data could also reveal potential problems and biases in what was being reported, especially as testing became less widespread in later 2021 and 2022. Most notably, areas with high social vulnerability scores in the large urban centers would map as having little disease which is counter to what is expected [ 26 , 27 , 28 ]. The erroneous map interpretation of these cold spots would have been that the more susceptible areas were being spared, whereas the reality was the map pattern was showing where there were testing deficiencies ( Figure 1 ).…”

Measuring the Impact of Future Outbreaks? A Secondary Analysis of Routinely Available Data in Spain

“…This study was carried out after successive waves of the pandemic to harness the available information. It has a focus on measures related to agility in government response to implement non-pharmacological measures [ 11 ], social vulnerability [ 24 ] and combines several epidemiological and socioeconomic indicators in line with what has been suggested by other studies [ 3 , 10 , 25 ] but with a greater number of variables in the algorithms. We have included information from different time points in order to provide a better understanding of the socioeconomic variables around the pandemic.…”

“…This remains controversial, as some authors have found similar results [ 10 , 25 ] and others have found differences between deprived and more wealthy areas [ 29 ]. However, a systematic review that included domains and variables of social vulnerability affecting COVID-19 such as population aged 65 years or older, unemployment rate, population living below poverty line and public health infrastructures found that higher social vulnerability experienced greater mortality rates during the COVID-19 pandemic [ 24 ]. The growth of per capita debt and the number of cases followed a similar trend, although this relationship was not significant.…”

Impact of social and cultural factors on incidence, transmission and control of Coronavirus disease in Iran: a qualitative study

“…On the other hand, providing financial subsistence support packages could have a significant effect on reducing public commuting but finally, poor support policies and social factors by the government caused people to defy the restrictions, which ultimately contributed to increase rate of infection and mortality. Further, social factors caused psychological problem, depression and violence among people [ 36 ]. These findings are consistent with the results of a study conducted in Santiago, Chile in 2021.…”

“…Other researchers have examined the effects of social distance on the living conditions of various people as children, pregnant women, the elderly and patients during the corona epidemic period [ 25 – 31 ]. Moreover in some essays the effect of quarantine and distance on the incidence of social anomalies and behavioral problems has been stated [ 32 – 36 ]. In another essay, researchers have examined the social and economic factors of the COVID epidemic in 42 Asian countries empirically.…”