Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35549712›Full record

ArticleHuman resources for health2022

Evaluation of the first two Frontline cohorts of the field epidemiology training program in Guinea, West Africa.

Doreen Collins, Boubacar Ibrahima Diallo, Mariama Boubacar Bah, Marlyatou Bah, Claire J Standley, Salomon Corvil, Lise D Martel, Pia D M MacDonald

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human resources for health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Doreen CollinsRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. doreen.collins@dlhcorp.com.ORCID 0000-0002-7036-7700
Boubacar Ibrahima DialloRTI International, Conakry, Guinea.
Mariama Boubacar BahRTI International, Conakry, Guinea.
Marlyatou BahRTI International, Conakry, Guinea.
Claire J StandleyCenter for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Salomon CorvilAfrican Field Epidemiology Network, Conakry, Guinea.
Lise D MartelUS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Pia D M MacDonaldRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
RTI International · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USGeorgetown University · US

Funding

CDC HHS U19GH001591CGH CDC HHS U19 GH001591
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 2014-2016 Ebola virus disease outbreak in West Africa revealed weaknesses in the health systems of the three most heavily affected countries, including a shortage of public health professionals at the local level trained in surveillance and outbreak investigation. In response, the Frontline Field Epidemiology Training Program (FETP) was created by CDC in 2015 as a 3-month, accelerated training program in field epidemiology that specifically targets the district level. In Guinea, the first two FETP-Frontline cohorts were held from January to May, and from June to September 2017. Here, we report the results of a cross-sectional evaluation of these first two cohorts of FETP-Frontline in Guinea.

methodsThe evaluation was conducted in April 2018 and consisted of interviews with graduates, their supervisors, and directors of nearby health facilities, as well as direct observation of data reports and surveillance tools at health facilities. Interviews and site visits were conducted using standardized questionnaires and checklists. Qualitative data were coded under common themes and analyzed using descriptive statistics.

resultsThe evaluation revealed a significant perception of improvement in all assessed skills by the graduates, as well as high levels of self-reported involvement in key activities related to data collection, analysis, and reporting. Supervisors highlighted improvements to systematic and quality case and summary reporting as key benefits of the FETP-Frontline program. At the health facility level, staff reported the training had resulted in improvements to information sharing and case notifications. Reported barriers included lack of transportation, available support personnel, and other resources. Graduates and supervisors both emphasized the importance of continued and additional training to solidify and retain skills.

conclusionsThe evaluation demonstrated a strongly positive perceived benefit of the FETP-Frontline training on the professional activities of graduates as well as the overall surveillance system. However, efforts are needed to ensure greater gender equity and to recruit more junior trainee candidates for future cohorts. Moreover, although improvements to the surveillance system were observed concurrent with the completion of the two cohorts, the evaluation was not designed to directly measure impact on surveillance or response functions. Combined with the rapid implementation of FETP-Frontline around the world, this suggests an opportunity to develop standardized evaluation toolkits, which could incorporate metrics that would directly assess the impact of equitable field epidemiology workforce development on countries' abilities to prevent, detect, and respond to public health threats.

Indexed as

EpidemiologyPublic HealthCross-Sectional StudiesDisease OutbreaksGuineaHumansProgram EvaluationWorkforceField epidemiologyWorkforce development

Identifiers

PMID35549712
PMCPMC9097411
OpenAlexW4280549954

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.