Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27482706›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2016

Facility-Based Delivery during the Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic in Rural Liberia: Analysis from a Cross-Sectional, Population-Based Household Survey.

John Ly, Vidiya Sathananthan, Thomas Griffiths, Zahir Kanjee, Avi Kenny, Nicholas Gordon, Gaurab Basu, Dale Battistoli, Lorenzo Dorr, Breeanna Lorenzen and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
18.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Changes in Access to Health Services during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

John LyMedical Team, Last Mile Health, Zwedru, Liberia.
Vidiya SathananthanMonitoring and Evaluation Team, Last Mile Health, Zwedru, Liberia.
Thomas GriffithsMonitoring and Evaluation Team, Last Mile Health, Zwedru, Liberia.
Zahir KanjeeDivision of Global Health Equity, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Avi KennyMonitoring and Evaluation Team, Last Mile Health, Zwedru, Liberia.ORCID 0000-0002-9465-7307
Nicholas GordonMonitoring and Evaluation Team, Last Mile Health, Zwedru, Liberia.ORCID 0000-0002-9570-3168
Gaurab BasuMonitoring and Evaluation Team, Last Mile Health, Zwedru, Liberia.ORCID 0000-0002-7531-4886
Dale BattistoliImplementation Team, Last Mile Health, Cestos City, Liberia.
Lorenzo DorrImplementation Team, Last Mile Health, Cestos City, Liberia.
Breeanna LorenzenImplementation Team, Last Mile Health, Cestos City, Liberia.
Dana R ThomsonDepartment of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Ami WatersMedical Team, Last Mile Health, Zwedru, Liberia.
Uriah G MooreRivercess County Health Team, Liberian Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, Cestos City, Liberia.ORCID 0000-0002-9822-8796
Ruth RobertsRivercess County Health Team, Liberian Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, Cestos City, Liberia.
Wilmot L SmithRivercess County Health Team, Liberian Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, Cestos City, Liberia.
Mark J SiednerHarvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3506-842X
John D KraemerDepartment of Health Systems Administration, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Ministry of Health and Social Welfare · LRHarvard University · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USCambridge Health Alliance · USGeorgetown University · US

Funding

Behavioral Aspects of Low-cost Medical Devices to Improve HIV CareK23MH099916 · NIMH · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI SIEDNER, MARK J · 2013 to 2017
$917k
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH099916
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Ebola virus disease (EVD) epidemic has threatened access to basic health services through facility closures, resource diversion, and decreased demand due to community fear and distrust. While modeling studies have attempted to estimate the impact of these disruptions, no studies have yet utilized population-based survey data. METHODS AND

findingsWe conducted a two-stage, cluster-sample household survey in Rivercess County, Liberia, in March-April 2015, which included a maternal and reproductive health module. We constructed a retrospective cohort of births beginning 4 y before the first day of survey administration (beginning March 24, 2011). We then fit logistic regression models to estimate associations between our primary outcome, facility-based delivery (FBD), and time period, defined as the pre-EVD period (March 24, 2011-June 14, 2014) or EVD period (June 15, 2014-April 13, 2015). We fit both univariable and multivariable models, adjusted for known predictors of facility delivery, accounting for clustering using linearized standard errors. To strengthen causal inference, we also conducted stratified analyses to assess changes in FBD by whether respondents believed that health facility attendance was an EVD risk factor. A total of 1,298 women from 941 households completed the survey. Median age at the time of survey was 29 y, and over 80% had a primary education or less. There were 686 births reported in the pre-EVD period and 212 in the EVD period. The unadjusted odds ratio of facility-based delivery in the EVD period was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.90, p-value = 0.010). Adjustment for potential confounders did not change the observed association, either in the principal model (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.70, 95%CI 0.50-0.98, p = 0.037) or a fully adjusted model (AOR = 0.69, 95%CI 0.50-0.97, p = 0.033). The association was robust in sensitivity analyses. The reduction in FBD during the EVD period was observed among those reporting a belief that health facilities are or may be a source of Ebola transmission (AOR = 0.59, 95%CI 0.36-0.97, p = 0.038), but not those without such a belief (AOR = 0.90, 95%CI 0.59-1.37, p = 0.612). Limitations include the possibility of FBD secular trends coincident with the EVD period, recall errors, and social desirability bias.

conclusionsWe detected a 30% decreased odds of FBD after the start of EVD in a rural Liberian county with relatively few cases. Because health facilities never closed in Rivercess County, this estimate may under-approximate the effect seen in the most heavily affected areas. These are the first population-based survey data to show collateral disruptions to facility-based delivery caused by the West African EVD epidemic, and they reinforce the need to consider the full spectrum of implications caused by public health emergencies.

Indexed as

EpidemicsAdultCluster AnalysisDelivery, ObstetricFamily CharacteristicsFemaleHemorrhagic Fever, EbolaHumansLiberiaMaternal Health ServicesPregnancyRural Health ServicesSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID27482706
PMCPMC4970816
OpenAlexW2498769281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.