ArticleJournal of women's health (2002)2017
Addressing Maternal Health During CDC's Ebola Response in the United States.
Article in Journal of women's health (2002), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of Ebola virus disease on maternal health service utilisation and perinatal outcomes in West Africa: a systematic review.Reproductive health · 2022Pooled it
- Emergency Preparedness and Response: Highlights from the Division of Reproductive Health, 2011-2021.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2021Article
- Social Media Survey and Web Posting Assessment of the COVID-19 Response in China: Health Worker Attitudes Toward Preparedness and Personal Protective Equipment Shortages.Open forum infectious diseases · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Previous outbreaks suggest that pregnant women with Ebola virus disease (EVD) are at increased risk for severe disease and death. Healthcare workers who treat pregnant women with EVD are at increased risk of body fluid exposure. Despite the absence of pregnant women with EVD in the United States, CDC activated the Maternal Health Team (MHT), a functional unit dedicated to emergency preparedness and response issues, on October 18, 2014. We describe major activities of the MHT. A high-priority MHT activity was to publish guiding principles early in the response. The MHT also prepared guidance documents, provided guidance and technical support for hospital preparedness, and addressed inquiries. We analyzed maternal health inquiries received through CDC-INFO, MHT, and CDC's Medical Investigations Team from August 2014 to December 2015. Internal call logs used to capture, monitor, and track inquiries for the three data sources were merged. Inquiries not related to maternal health issues and duplicates were removed. Each inquiry was categorized by route (email/phone), inquirer type, and topic. In total, 201 inquiries were received from clinicians, public health professionals, and the public. The predominant topic was related to infection control for high-risk situations such as labor and delivery. During the Ebola response, most inquiries were received via email rather than telephone, a notable shift compared to the H1N1 emergency response. Lessons learned during the H1N1 and Ebola responses are currently informing CDC's Zika Response, an unprecedented emergency response primarily focused on reproductive health issues.
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.