Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39034385›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2024

Ethical considerations during Mpox Outbreak: a scoping review.

Fatma Badr El Dine, Assem Gebreal, Dalia Samhouri, Haimanot Estifanos, Islam Kourampi, Hasnaa Abdelrhem, Hamed Abdelma'aboud Mostafa, Ahmed Gamal Elshaar, Tarun Kumar Suvvari, Ramy Mohamed Ghazy

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 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. Review
  9. Article
  10. Misinformation, disinformation, and fake news amid the new global Mpox emergency.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2024
    Article
  11. Mpox in India: Current Insights and Strategic Recommendations.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine
    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

10 authors.

Fatma Badr El DineForensic Medicine and Clinical Toxicology, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Assem GebrealFaculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt. assem.Ahmed1801@alexmed.edu.eg.
Dalia SamhouriRegional Manager, Emergency Preparedness & International Health Regulations WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean, Cairo, Egypt.
Haimanot EstifanosFaculty of Medicine, University of Nis, Nis, Serbia.
Islam KourampiDepartment of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Hasnaa AbdelrhemFaculty of Science, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Hamed Abdelma'aboud MostafaFaculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Dameitta, Egypt.
Ahmed Gamal ElshaarFaculty of Medicine, Menofia University, Shebin al-Kom, Egypt.
Tarun Kumar SuvvariRangaraya Medical College, Kakinada, India.
Ramy Mohamed GhazyDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHistorically, epidemics have been accompanied by the concurrent emergence of stigma, prejudice, and xenophobia. This scoping review aimed to describe and map published research targeting ethical values concerning monkeypox (mpox). In addition, it aimed to understand the research gaps related to mpox associated stigma.

methodsWe comprehensively searched databases (PubMed Central, PubMed Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid, and Google Scholar) to identify published literature concerning mpox ethical issues and stigma from May 6, 2022, to February 15, 2023. The key search terms used were "monkeypox", "ethics", "morals", "social stigma", "privacy", "confidentiality", "secrecy", "privilege", "egoism", and "metaethics". This scoping review followed the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley in 2005 and was further improved by the recommendations of Levac et al. in 2010.

resultsThe search strategies employed in the scoping review yielded a total of 454 articles. We analyzed the sources, types, and topics of the retrieved articles/studies. The authors were able to identify 32 studies that met inclusion criteria. Six of the 32 included studies were primary research. The study revealed that the ongoing mpox outbreak is contending with a notable surge in misinformation and societal stigma. It highlights the adverse impacts of stigma and ethical concerns associated with mpox, which can negatively affect people with the disease.

conclusionThe study's findings underscore the imperative need to enhance public awareness; involve civil society; and promote collaboration among policymakers, medical communities, and social media platforms. These collective endeavors are crucial for mitigating stigma, averting human-to-human transmission, tackling racism, and dispelling misconceptions associated with the outbreak.

Indexed as

Disease OutbreaksMpox, MonkeypoxSocial StigmaConfidentialityHumansMoralsPrivacyConfidentialityDiscriminationEthicsMonkeypoxMoral issuesStigma

Identifiers

PMID39034385
PMCPMC11265031

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.