ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2019
Vaccination strategies to control Ebola epidemics in the context of variable household inaccessibility levels.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Comparing the effectiveness of ring and block-vaccination strategies on networks.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Reducing transmission in multiple settings is required to eliminate the risk of major Ebola outbreaks: a mathematical modelling study.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
- Article
- A comprehensive analysis of non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination on Ebolavirus disease outbreak: Stochastic modeling approach.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- Indirect Effects of Ebola Virus Disease Epidemics on Health Systems in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia: A Scoping Review Supplemented with Expert Interviews.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Monkeypox and Its Possible Sexual Transmission: Where Are We Now with Its Evidence?Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Current state of Ebola virus vaccines: A snapshot.PLoS pathogens · 2021Article
- Sociodemographic factors associated with acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine and clinical trials in Uganda: a cross-sectional study in western Uganda.BMC public health · 2021Article
- A model and predictions for COVID-19 considering population behavior and vaccination.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Picking up a Fight: Fine Tuning Mitochondrial Innate Immune Defenses Against RNA Viruses.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite a very effective vaccine, active conflict and community distrust during the ongoing DRC Ebola epidemic are undermining control efforts, including a ring vaccination strategy that requires the prompt immunization of close contacts of infected individuals. However, in April 2019, it was reported 20% or more of close contacts cannot be reached or refuse vaccination, and it is predicted that the ring vaccination strategy would not be effective with such a high level of inaccessibility. The vaccination strategy is now incorporating a "third ring" community-level vaccination that targets members of communities even if they are not known contacts of Ebola cases. To assess the impact of vaccination strategies for controlling Ebola epidemics in the context of variable levels of community accessibility, we employed an individual-level stochastic transmission model that incorporates four sources of heterogeneity: a proportion of the population is inaccessible for contact tracing and vaccination due to lack of confidence in interventions or geographic inaccessibility, two levels of population mixing resembling household and community transmission, two types of vaccine doses with different time periods until immunity, and transmission rates that depend on spatial distance. Our results indicate that a ring vaccination strategy alone would not be effective for containing the epidemic in the context of significant delays to vaccinating contacts even for low levels of household inaccessibility and affirm the positive impact of a supplemental community vaccination strategy. Our key results are that as levels of inaccessibility increase, there is a qualitative change in the effectiveness of the vaccination strategy. For higher levels of vaccine access, the probability that the epidemic will end steadily increases over time, even if probabilities are lower than they would be otherwise with full community participation. For levels of vaccine access that are too low, however, the vaccination strategies are not expected to be successful in ending the epidemic even though they help lower incidence levels, which saves lives, and makes the epidemic easier to contain and reduces spread to other communities. This qualitative change occurs for both types of vaccination strategies: ring vaccination is effective for containing an outbreak until the levels of inaccessibility exceeds approximately 10% in the context of significant delays to vaccinating contacts, a combined ring and community vaccination strategy is effective until the levels of inaccessibility exceeds approximately 50%. More broadly, our results underscore the need to enhance community engagement to public health interventions in order to enhance the effectiveness of control interventions to ensure outbreak containment.
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.