Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33953623›Full record

ReviewRisk management and healthcare policy2021

Responding to the 2018-2020 Ebola Virus Outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Rethinking Humanitarian Approaches.

Susannah H Mayhew, Patrick Milabyo Kyamusugulwa, Kennedy Kihangi Bindu, Paul Richards, Cyrille Kiyungu, Dina Balabanova

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Ebola virus-like particles reprogram cellular metabolism.Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors.

Susannah H MayhewDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2433-3809
Patrick Milabyo KyamusugulwaBukavu Medical University College/Institut Supérieur des Techniques Médicales de Bukavu (ISTM-Bukavu), Bukavu, Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
Kennedy Kihangi BinduCentre de Recherche sur la Démocratie et le Développement en Afrique (CREDDA), Université Libre des Pays des Grands Lacs, Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo.
Paul RichardsSchool of Environmental Sciences, Njala University, Freetown, Sierra Leone.
Cyrille KiyunguHygiene, State Administration, Kikwit, Democratic Republic of Congo.
Dina BalabanovaDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N015754/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) presents a challenging context in which to respond to public health crises. Its 2018-2020 Ebola outbreak was the second largest in history. Lessons were known from the previous West African outbreak. Chief among these was the recognition that local action and involvement are key to establishing effective epidemic-response. It remains unclear whether and how this was achieved in DRC's Ebola response. Additionally, there is a lack of scholarship on how to build resilience (the ability to adapt or transform under pressure) in crisis-response. In this article, we critically review literature to examine evidence on whether and how communities were involved, trust built, and resilience strengthened through adaptation or transformation of DRC's 2018-2020 Ebola response measures. Overall, we found limited evidence that the response adapted to engage and involve local actors and institutions or respond to locally expressed concerns. When adaptations occurred, they were shaped by national and international actors rather than enabling local actors to develop locally trusted initiatives. Communities were "engaged" to understand their perceptions but were not involved in decision-making or shaping responses. Few studies documented how trust was built or analyzed power dynamics between different groups in DRC. Yet, both these elements appear to be critical in building effective, resilient responses. These failures occurred because there was no willingness by the national government or international agencies to concede decision-making power to local people. Emergency humanitarian response is entrenched in highly medicalized, military style command and control approaches which have no space for decentralizing decision-making to "non-experts". To transform humanitarian responses, international responders can no longer be regarded as "experts" who own the knowledge and control the response. To successfully tackle future humanitarian crises requires a transformation of international humanitarian and emergency response systems such that they are led, or shaped, through inclusive, equitable collaboration with local actors.

Indexed as

communityDemocratic Republic of CongoEbolahumanitarian emergencypandemic responsesocial science

Identifiers

PMID33953623
PMCPMC8092619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.