ArticleBMC infectious diseases2015
Stakeholders' engagement with Ebola therapy research in resource limited settings.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Operational strategies among infectious disease clinical trial sites during pandemics: a scoping review.Trials · 2026Article
- Impacts of Ebola disease outbreak in West Africa: Implications for government and public health preparedness and lessons from COVID-19.Scientific African · 2023Article
- Sharing results with participants (and community) in malaria related research: Perspectives and experience from researchers.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- How can community engagement in health research be strengthened for infectious disease outbreaks in Sub-Saharan Africa? A scoping review of the literature.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Addressing challenges for clinical research responses to emerging epidemics and pandemics: a scoping review.BMC medicine · 2020Article
- [Epidemic and emerging prone-infectious diseases: Lessons learned and ways forward].Presse medicale (Paris, France : 1983) · 2019Review
- Forming and implementing community advisory boards in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.BMC medical ethics · 2019Article
- Global Critical Care: Moving Forward in Resource-Limited Settings.Annals of global health · 2019Review
- Ebola vaccine development plan: ethics, concerns and proposed measures.BMC medical ethics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe current Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak in West Africa is the largest in history. As of February 18(th) 2015, 23,258 cases of EVD have been cumulatively reported from Nigeria, Senegal, Guinea, Liberia, Mali, Sierra Leone, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States of America resulting in more than 9,000 deaths. It is therefore exigent to develop prevention and treatment therapies for EVD. DISCUSSION: Several new EVD treatments are in clinical development at this time. Based on lessons learned, four critical processes need to be implemented before clinical trials begin. First, all global EVD research need to be coordinated to promote data sharing and synergistic overlap, while reducing unnecessary duplication of efforts. The World Health Organization is well-placed to undertake such an endeavor. Second, governments of affected nations where trials are being proposed need to lead discussions regarding immediate access to any proven medications for epidemics. Also, governments need to leverage international resources to support and expand existing national expertise to jointly conduct high-caliber clinical research; and resources must be used to enhance local technical skills and expand existing personnel. Third, ethics committees must review protocols, monitor the research process, and work closely with research scientists to insure the ethical integrity of research throughout the trials. Fourth, community advisory boards (CAB) need to be formed, linked with existing community leadership structures and organized in conjunction with trial implementation. These community structures should work together with ethics committees to facilitate the study design, informed consent process, and study implementation. We must facilitate communication and mutual understanding between trial communities and research teams, and promote positive collaborations between all stakeholders engaged in EVD research. The community engagement process for EVD research is crucial to address myths and misconceptions, and to promote study volunteers' understanding of the research details. The collaboration between all stakeholders is crucial for continued long term partnership to address EVD outbreak and none of the stakeholders should be left behind in ongoing efforts to develop EVD therapies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.