ArticleBMJ public health2024
Scoping review of countries' practices missed by health emergency preparedness and response quantitative tools: COVID-19 and Ebola response experiences.
Article in BMJ public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learning from Ebola Alerts in the Pandemic Agreement Era: Preparedness, Trust, and Shared Responsibility.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The equity catastrophe: how securitized financing collapses essential care during health crises.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: After the COVID-19 pandemic and previous disease outbreaks, it is critical to continuously examine the preparedness measurement tools and level of country preparedness for future health emergencies. Existing preparedness quantitative tools, such as the 2021 Global Health Security Index (GHSI) and Joint External Evaluation (JEE) second edition, may not fully reflect the country's actual practices during an outbreak. This scoping review profiles countries' practices, actions and experiences during Ebola and COVID-19 pandemics missed by these tools but critical to a successful response. Methods: Using the PRISMA checklist for scoping reviews, we documented country practices during health emergence responses. Our search strategy keywords included "actions/practices," "preparedness/response," "Ebola/COVID-19," and "successes/experiences/challenges," across PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Google Scholar and WHO IRIS. English peer-reviewed articles published between January 2004 and October 2020 for Ebola and between January 2020 and December 2022 for COVID-19 were included. Articles were independently assessed for inclusion and discordant decisions were agreed on by consensus. A qualitative thematic analysis was conducted and findings were presented by a disease outbreak. Results: Out of 1913 studies screened, 36 were included. The COVID-19 and Ebola response practices, actions, and experiences not included in the GHSI 2021 and JEE second edition tools included; use of previous outbreaks lessons, cushioning the populations and putting in place mechanisms to support businesses, protection of vulnerable populations, leveraging the trust in leadership and role models, and innovative ways of engaging the public through use of technology. Conclusion: Countries' outbreak response strategies depend on the available resources, the outbreak characteristics, its effects and how other countries are responding. This study suggests incorporating capacities of these response actions into existing tools and countries should make detailed plans on how they can leverage existing trust, protect the vulnerable, cushion citizens and businesses from epidemic effects, and innovatively use technology to engage the public in epidemic responses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.