Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39606067›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2024

Existing operational standards for field deployments of rapid response mobile laboratories: a scoping review.

Rand Mushasha, Adela Paez Jimenez, Virginie Dolmazon, Jan Baumann, Andreas Jansen, Oleg Nikolayevich Storozhenko, Charbel El-Bcheraoui

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

7 authors.

Rand MushashaEvidence-Based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Adela Paez JimenezWorld Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Virginie DolmazonWorld Health Organization (WHO), Geneva, Switzerland.
Jan BaumannWorld Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Andreas JansenInformation Centre for International Health Protection, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Oleg Nikolayevich Storozhenko *World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Charbel El-Bcheraoui *Evidence-Based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Rapid response mobile laboratories (RRML) play an important role in responding to emergencies such as outbreaks and humanitarian crises, working in coordination with national authorities. This scoping review aims to provide evidence to support the development of minimum operational standards for the deployment of RRMLs across the five key workstreams: operational support and logistics, biosafety and biosecurity, laboratory information management system, quality management systems and interoperability and coordination. Methods: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the grey literature focusing on RRML deployment missions. Study characteristics such as year, country, objectives, methods, and findings were extracted and summarized to identify common themes, gaps, and patterns. The results were presented in a narrative format. We ensured methodological rigor by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines throughout the review process. Results: Out of 163 full-text studies assessed for eligibility, 46 met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Six studies addressed the five RRML workstreams. Operational support and logistics are most commonly addressed during pre-deployment phases with a focus on personnel, transport and cold chain management. The application of biosafety and biosecurity protocols is most addressed during the mission execution phase, particularly in the use of personal protective equipment and the implementation of decontamination and disinfection procedures. The laboratory information management system procedures most frequently reported include sample identification and result dissemination protocols. The quality management system workstream overlaps significantly with the other four workstreams, with a strong emphasis on internal and external quality assurance measures. Coordination and interoperability aspects involve maintaining multiple collaborations, ranging from coordinating with local authorities to establishing international partnerships. Common field challenges included interrupted data transfer in areas characterized by poor connectivity and difficulties caused by extreme weather conditions. Discussion: This review highlights RRML deployment procedures and addresses some critical challenges concerning their deployment. It suggests the provision of a pre-deployment logistics checklist, the use of a pre-determined standardized dataset for inputs to reduce data entry errors and the application of standardized internal and external quality assurance measures.

Indexed as

LaboratoriesDisease OutbreaksHumansMobile Health Unitsdeploymentmobile laboratoryoperational standardsrapid responserapid response mobile laboratory

Identifiers

PMID39606067
PMCPMC11599251

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.