Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39869635›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2025

The WHO Disease Outbreak News during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Ciara M Weets, Colin J Carlson, Hailey Robertson, Kate Toole, Lauren McGivern, Ellie Graeden, Rebecca Katz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Ciara M WeetsCenter for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3801-5713
Colin J CarlsonDepartment of Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut, United States of America.
Hailey RobertsonCenter for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2988-307X
Kate TooleCenter for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3109-0785
Lauren McGivernCenter for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Ellie GraedenCenter for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Rebecca KatzCenter for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the Covid-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) was an important public source of information - not only about the pandemic, but also thousands of other potential health emergencies. Here, we examine the 242 reports published in the WHO Disease Outbreak News (DON) during the first four years of the Covid-19 pandemic (2020 to 2023), and document the diseases and regions that were reported. We find that multinational epidemics of diseases like Ebola virus and MERS-CoV continue to dominate the DON. However, recent years have also seen more reports of climate-sensitive infectious diseases, as well as a state shift in influenza outbreak reporting in both China and the rest of the world. Surprisingly, the DON was only minimally used to document the Covid-19 pandemic and the global clade II mpox epidemic, almost exclusively before the declaration of a public health emergency of international concern. Notably, inconsistent reporting related to Covid-19 variants of concern speaks to the ongoing evolution of the DON as a resource, and potentially, to its complicated relationship with international travel and trade restrictions. We suggest that researchers should continue to exercise caution when treating the DON as a global record of outbreak history, but that the DON is a compelling record of the WHO itself, including the process it uses to assess outbreak risk.

Identifiers

PMID39869635
PMCPMC11771871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.