Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33317544›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2020

Early detection of cholera epidemics to support control in fragile states: estimation of delays and potential epidemic sizes.

Ruwan Ratnayake, Flavio Finger, W John Edmunds, Francesco Checchi

Open access · goldAbstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Time to invest in cholera.EClinicalMedicine · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Implementation of targeted cholera response activities, Cameroon.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2023
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ruwan RatnayakeDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. ruwan.ratnayake@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4978-6668
Flavio FingerEpicentre, Paris, France.
W John EdmundsDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Francesco ChecchiDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

CIHR DFS-164266UK Research and Innovation as part of the Global Challenges Research Fund ES/P010873/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCholera epidemics continue to challenge disease control, particularly in fragile and conflict-affected states. Rapid detection and response to small cholera clusters is key for efficient control before an epidemic propagates. To understand the capacity for early response in fragile states, we investigated delays in outbreak detection, investigation, response, and laboratory confirmation, and we estimated epidemic sizes. We assessed predictors of delays, and annual changes in response time.

methodsWe compiled a list of cholera outbreaks in fragile and conflict-affected states from 2008 to 2019. We searched for peer-reviewed articles and epidemiological reports. We evaluated delays from the dates of symptom onset of the primary case, and the earliest dates of outbreak detection, investigation, response, and confirmation. Information on how the outbreak was alerted was summarized. A branching process model was used to estimate epidemic size at each delay. Regression models were used to investigate the association between predictors and delays to response.

resultsSeventy-six outbreaks from 34 countries were included. Median delays spanned 1-2 weeks: from symptom onset of the primary case to presentation at the health facility (5 days, IQR 5-5), detection (5 days, IQR 5-6), investigation (7 days, IQR 5.8-13.3), response (10 days, IQR 7-18), and confirmation (11 days, IQR 7-16). In the model simulation, the median delay to response (10 days) with 3 seed cases led to a median epidemic size of 12 cases (upper range, 47) and 8% of outbreaks ≥ 20 cases (increasing to 32% with a 30-day delay to response). Increased outbreak size at detection (10 seed cases) and a 10-day median delay to response resulted in an epidemic size of 34 cases (upper range 67 cases) and < 1% of outbreaks < 20 cases. We estimated an annual global decrease in delay to response of 5.2% (95% CI 0.5-9.6, p = 0.03). Outbreaks signaled by immediate alerts were associated with a reduction in delay to response of 39.3% (95% CI 5.7-61.0, p = 0.03).

conclusionsFrom 2008 to 2019, median delays from symptom onset of the primary case to case presentation and to response were 5 days and 10 days, respectively. Our model simulations suggest that depending on the outbreak size (3 versus 10 seed cases), in 8 to 99% of scenarios, a 10-day delay to response would result in large clusters that would be difficult to contain. Improving the delay to response involves rethinking the integration at local levels of event-based detection, rapid diagnostic testing for cluster validation, and integrated alert, investigation, and response.

Indexed as

Early DiagnosisEpidemicsArmed ConflictsCholeraComputer SimulationDelayed DiagnosisDeveloping CountriesDisease OutbreaksEarly Medical InterventionHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumansInfection ControlModels, StatisticalPopulation SurveillanceReaction TimeArmed conflictCholeraCommunicable disease controlEpidemicsOutbreaksRefugeesSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID33317544
PMCPMC7737284
OpenAlexW3111749239

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.