Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40234051›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2025

Contrasting the impact and cost-effectiveness of successive intervention strategies in response to Ebola in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2018-2020.

Thibaut Jombart, Wu Zeng, Michel Yao, Anne Cori, Steve Ahuka-Mundeke, Hadia Samaha, Thomas Wilkinson, Mathias Mossoko, Jean-Pierre Lokonga, Dominique Baabo and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

14 authors.

Thibaut JombartMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK thibautjombart@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2226-8692
Wu ZengDepartment of Global Health, Georgetown University, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3473-3638
Michel YaoWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Anne CoriMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Jameel Institute, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8443-9162
Steve Ahuka-MundekeInstitut National de Recherche Biomédicale, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo.
Hadia SamahaHealth, Nutrition and Population, World Bank Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Thomas WilkinsonHealth, Nutrition and Population, World Bank Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Mathias MossokoMinistry of Health, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo.
Jean-Pierre LokongaHealth System Development Project, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo.
Dominique BaaboUNICEF, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo.
Fatima El Kadiri El YaminiHealth, Nutrition and Population, World Bank Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Patrick Hoang-Vu EozenouHealth, Nutrition and Population, World Bank Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Sylvain YumaMinistry of Health, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo.
Linda MobulaHealth, Nutrition and Population, World Bank Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.

Funding

Wellcome TrustWorld Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe 10th outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in 2018-2020 was the largest in DRC's history and the second largest worldwide. Different strategic response plans (SRPs) were implemented, and the outbreak was eventually stopped after a large scale-up of operations with the SRP 4, which benefited from all public health measures deployed during SRPs 1-3, upon which it developed a more holistic approach including community engagement, logistics and security.

methodsWe used modelling to characterise EVD transmission and assess the epidemiological impact of the two main response strategies (SRPs 1-3 vs SRP 4). We simulated potential future epidemics with different intervention scenarios, combined with a costing model to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of different strategies.

resultsWe estimated a mean effective reproduction number

conclusionMost EVD outbreaks are expected to be small and can be contained with SRPs 1-3. In outbreaks with increased transmissibility or in the presence of insecurity, rapid scale-up to SRP 4 is likely to save lives and be cost-effective.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisDisease OutbreaksHemorrhagic Fever, EbolaDemocratic Republic of the CongoHumansHealth systems evaluationMathematical modellingViral haemorrhagic fevers

Identifiers

PMID40234051
PMCPMC12004461

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.