Kathya Cordova-PozoHubert KorziliusE.A.J.A. RouwetteGabriela PírizRolando Herrera-GutierrezGraciela Cordova-PozoMiguel Orozco2026-03-222026-03-22202110.3390/ijerph181910002https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph181910002https://andeanlibrary.org/handle/123456789/46391Citaciones: 4Similar interventions to stop the spread of COVID-19 led to different outcomes in Latin American countries. This study aimed to capture the multicausality of factors affecting HS-capacity that could help plan a more effective response, considering health as well as social aspects. A facilitated GMB was constructed by experts and validated with a survey from a wider population. Statistical analyses estimated the impact of the main factors to the HS-capacity and revealed the differences in its mechanisms. The results show a similar four-factor structure in all countries that includes public administration, preparedness, information, and collective self-efficacy. The factors are correlated and have mediating effects with HS-capacity; this is the base for differences among countries. HS-capacity has a strong relation with public administration in Bolivia, while in Nicaragua and Uruguay it is related through preparedness. Nicaragua lacks information as a mediation effect with HS-capacity whereas Bolivia and Uruguay have, respectively, small and large mediation effects with it. These outcomes increase the understanding of the pandemic based on country-specific context and can aid policymaking in low-and middle-income countries by including these factors in future pandemic response models.enPreparednessMediationLatin AmericansPandemicContext (archaeology)Public healthEnvironmental healthPsychological interventionPopulationPolitical sciencearticle