ArticleBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2025
[Evaluation of the Robert Koch Institute's missions for COVID-19 outbreak investigations by local and state health authorities in Germany].
Article in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundUnder the German Infection Protection Act, the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) can support local health authorities (LHAs) and state health authorities (SHAs) in outbreak investigations after an administrative request for assistance. During the COVID-19 pandemic, about 50 RKI teams supported LHAs and SHAs in outbreak investigations (virtually or on site). Reasons for or against requesting assistance as well as the assessment of outbreak deployments that have taken place should be collected and analysed.
methodsBetween 9 March 2023 and 12 May 2023, the RKI provided all LHAs (n = 376) and SHAs (n = 10) with a link to an online survey that included questions about whether, how often, and why or why not an RKI field team was requested. If a deployment took place, we asked for an assessment of the usefulness and timeliness of the deployment, their satisfaction with it and the work load involved.
resultsA total of 146 authorities (136 LHAs and 10 SHAs) responded; 21 (14%) requested an RKI team at least once and gave feedback on 22 deployments. Common reasons for not requesting were no need (60%, 56/94) and no experience with (31%, 29/34) or knowledge of the assistance request process (29%, 27/94). The 22 deployments took place between February 2020 and September 2021. The reasons for requesting assistance were lack of professional expertise (n = 18), personnel resources (n = 13) or political/public pressure (n = 12). The biggest benefit of the RKI deployments was answering epidemiological questions (n = 18). The SHAs and LHAs were satisfied with 20 of the deployments and the RKI team arrived on time for 19. The additional workload for the requesting authorities was judged to be reasonable. DISCUSSION: LHAs and SHAs rated the RKI deployments positively. Regarding the assistance request processes, there was a need for information that should be covered by training and provision of information material.
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.