Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33858478›Full record

ArticleConflict and health2021

Lessons learned from implementation of a national hotline for Ebola virus disease emergency preparedness in South Sudan.

Velma K Lopez, Sharmila Shetty, Angelo Thon Kouch, Matthew Tut Khol, Richard Lako, Alexandre Bili, Anyang David Ayuen, Agnes Jukudu, Ajak Ater Kug, Atem David Mayen and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conflict and health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

15 authors.

Velma K LopezDivision of Global Health Protection, Center for Global Health, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. oko8@cdc.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2926-4010
Sharmila ShettyDivision of Global Health Protection, Center for Global Health, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Angelo Thon KouchMinistry of Health, Juba, South Sudan.
Matthew Tut KholMinistry of Health, Juba, South Sudan.
Richard LakoMinistry of Health, Juba, South Sudan.
Alexandre BiliMinistry of Health, Juba, South Sudan.
Anyang David AyuenMinistry of Health, Juba, South Sudan.
Agnes JukuduMinistry of Health, Juba, South Sudan.
Ajak Ater KugMinistry of Health, Juba, South Sudan.
Atem David MayenMinistry of Health, Juba, South Sudan.
Emmanuel NyawelMinistry of Health, Juba, South Sudan.
Kibebu BertaWorld Health Organization, Juba, South Sudan.
Olushayo OluWorld Health Organization, Juba, South Sudan.
Kevin ClarkeDivision of Global Health Protection, Center for Global Health, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Sudhir BungaDivision of Global HIV and TB, Center for Global Health, CDC, Juba, South Sudan.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe world's second largest Ebola outbreak occurred in the Democratic Republic of Congo from 2018 to 2020. At the time, risk of cross-border spread into South Sudan was very high. Thus, the South Sudan Ministry of Health scaled up Ebola preparedness activities in August 2018, including implementation of a 24-h, toll-free Ebola virus disease (EVD) hotline. The primary purpose was the hotline was to receive EVD alerts and the secondary goal was to provide evidence-based EVD messages to the public.

methodsTo assess whether the hotline augmented Ebola preparedness activities in a protracted humanitarian emergency context, we reviewed 22 weeks of call logs from January to June 2019. Counts and percentages were calculated for all available data.

resultsThe hotline received 2114 calls during the analysis period, and an additional 1835 missed calls were documented. Callers used the hotline throughout 24-h of the day and were most often men and individuals living in Jubek state, where the national capital is located. The leading reasons for calling were to learn more about EVD (68%) or to report clinical signs or symptoms (16%). Common EVD-related questions included EVD signs and symptoms, transmission, and prevention. Only one call was documented as an EVD alert, and there was no documentation of reported symptoms or whether the person met the EVD case definition.

conclusionsBasic surveillance information was not collected from callers. To trigger effective outbreak investigation from hotline calls, the hotline should capture who is reporting and from where, symptoms and travel history, and whether this information should be further investigated. Electronic data capture will enhance data quality and availability of information for review. Additionally, the magnitude of missed calls presents a major challenge. When calls are answered, there is potential to provide health communication, so risk communication needs should be considered. However, prior to hotline implementation, governments should critically assess whether their hotline would yield actionable data and if other data sources for surveillance or community concerns are available.

Indexed as

EbolaEmergency preparednessHotline

Identifiers

PMID33858478
PMCPMC8047513

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.