Biomedical publications on Ebola and the 2014 outbreak

Ballabeni, Andrea; Boggio, Andrea

doi:10.12688/f1000research.6206.1

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Globally, more than 700 million people live in low-income countries [ 5 ], while 2 billion live in fragile or conflict-affected settings [ 6 ]. Responses to large-scale epidemics or epidemics of newly emergent pathogens tend to generate global attention and corresponding responses incur scrutiny [ 7 – 9 ]. However, evidence on responses to smaller-scale epidemics or epidemics involving well-known pathogens (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The practice of evaluating epidemic response in humanitarian and low-income settings: a systematic review

Warsame

Murray

Gimma

et al. 2020

BMC Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Epidemics of infectious disease occur frequently in low-income and humanitarian settings and pose a serious threat to populations. However, relatively little is known about responses to these epidemics. Robust evaluations can generate evidence on response efforts and inform future improvements. This systematic review aimed to (i) identify epidemics reported in low-income and crisis settings, (ii) determine the frequency with which evaluations of responses to these epidemics were conducted, (iii) describe the main typologies of evaluations undertaken and (iv) identify key gaps and strengths of recent evaluation practice. Methods Reported epidemics were extracted from the following sources: World Health Organization Disease Outbreak News (WHO DON), UNICEF Cholera platform, Reliefweb, PROMED and Global Incidence Map. A systematic review for evaluation reports was conducted using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, Web of Science, WPRIM, Reliefweb, PDQ Evidence and CINAHL Plus databases, complemented by grey literature searches using Google and Google Scholar. Evaluation records were quality-scored and linked to epidemics based on time and place. The time period for the review was 2010–2019. Results A total of 429 epidemics were identified, primarily in sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. A total of 15,424 potential evaluations records were screened, 699 assessed for eligibility and 132 included for narrative synthesis. Only one tenth of epidemics had a corresponding response evaluation. Overall, there was wide variability in the quality, content as well as in the disease coverage of evaluation reports. Conclusion The current state of evaluations of responses to these epidemics reveals large gaps in coverage and quality and bears important implications for health equity and accountability to affected populations. The limited availability of epidemic response evaluations prevents improvements to future public health response. The diversity of emphasis and methods of available evaluations limits comparison across responses and time. In order to improve future response and save lives, there is a pressing need to develop a standardized and practical approach as well as governance arrangements to ensure the systematic conduct of epidemic response evaluations in low-income and crisis settings.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The practice of evaluating epidemic response in humanitarian and low-income settings: a systematic review

Warsame

Murray

Gimma

et al. 2020

BMC Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As noted above, a limited number of scientific papers explicitly or implicitly address the question of drivers for spillover. Most recent papers published in 2014 and 2015 have a focus on human to human transmission in response to the magnitude of the current outbreak in West Africa, which has fuelled the research and publications on EBOV (Ballabeni and Boggio, 2015;Cruz-Calderón et al, 2015). The analysis presented in this report may need to be updated in order to possibly integrate the bloom in publications on EBOV.…”

Section: Network Of Citations and Timelinementioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers for occasional spillover event of Ebola virus

2015

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to provide urgent technical assistance in the field of plant health as regards the list of host plants of Xylella fastidiosa reported in Appendix В of the recently published EFSA Scientific Opinion on X. fastidiosa. In this technical report the list of host plants is categorised focusing on plant species traded as plants for planting and taking into account available data and information on the trade and cultivation of host plants and on infection with X. fastidiosa. Based on this characterisation, a definition of the host plants of X. fastidiosa which have been both (1) naturally infected and (2) confirmed by at least two different testing methods is provided, together with indication when vector transmission has been confirmed by two testing methods. An electronic dataset is appended to this technical report and provides a searchable list of host plant species.

show abstract

“…However, English is only natively spoken by around 5% of the world population and only about 20 countries use it as their primary language (http://www.ethnologue.com/statistics/size). Not surprisingly, in 2014, only 4 out of the 20 countries with highest number of life science publications have English as their primary language , and in the 5‐year period 2008–2012, nearly 54% of papers on PubMed were written in countries where English is not the primary idiom .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%