Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32226328›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in infectious diseases2016

A Brief History of Biocontainment.

Theodore J Cieslak, Mark G Kortepeter

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Ethical Preparedness for U.S. Biocontainment Units.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Cytometry in High-Containment Laboratories.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Biodefence research two decades on: worth the investment?The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2021
    Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Theodore J CieslakDepartment of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198 USA.
Mark G KortepeterDepartment of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198 USA.
Nebraska Medical Center · USUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The concept of clinical biocontainment, otherwise known as high-level containment care (HLCC), had its birth among a confluence of near-simultaneous events in 1969. The U.S. Army's Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) began construction of the first modern biocontainment unit that year, and opened the two-bed facility, often referred to as "the Slammer" in 1971. Over its 41-year existence, 21 persons exposed to highly hazardous infectious diseases were admitted to the Slammer, but none ever contracted the disease to which they had been exposed. Owing, in part, to this underutilization, some questioned the utility of HLCC units. This concern notwithstanding, Emory University and the University of Nebraska opened HLCC units in civilian academic medical centers in 2004 and 2005, respectively. These units, distinct from conventional infectious disease isolation wards found in most major medical centers, proved their worth during the West African Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak of 2014-2015. It is our opinion that such units, as well as the parallel high-level containment transport systems necessary to move patients to them, will continue to play an important role in the global response to emerging and highly hazardous contagious pathogens. Moreover, we feel that the lessons derived from their successful operation will lead to improvements in infection control procedures and practices throughout the healthcare system.

Indexed as

BiocontainmentBiosafetyEbolaHigh-level containment careInfection control

Identifiers

PMID32226328
PMCPMC7099915
OpenAlexW2539039020

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.