ArticleScientific reports2025
Global perspectives on infectious diseases at risk of escalation and their drivers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing equity through community-led, globally connected infectious disease research.Nature microbiology · 2026Article
- Strengthening health systems in lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) in Africa through the WHO Hub for emergency preparedness and outbreak response.One health outlook · 2026Review
- Measurement of Tuberculosis treatment adherence: A methodological scoping review of observational studies.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Point-of-care molecular diagnostics and drug-resistance mechanisms in neglected infectious diseases: current advances and future therapeutic opportunities.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Infectious disease burden is dynamic and devastating across the globe. We need to better understand and predict these threats to mitigate harm from new, re-emergent and endemic pathogens. 3,752 globally diverse participants took part in this two-step, mixed-methods adapted Delphi study. Firstly, an online survey asked health workers and researchers to identify the infectious diseases they considered to be at greatest risk of escalation in their setting, along with the factors driving this. Secondly, structured thematic workshops were hosted in Africa, Asia and Latin America, to allow in-depth exploration of the factors driving the prioritisation of these diseases. Participants considered the primary threat to be the escalation of high burden, endemic diseases, rather than emerging or re-emerging pathogen outbreaks. This was driven by the high prioritisation of vector-borne diseases (primarily malaria and dengue), tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS. Whilst the main finding from survey responses (n = 3,700) identified growing concern over tuberculosis, participants in the subsequent workshops (n = 169) emphasised the increasing threat of vector-borne diseases. Participants considered the impact of climate change, socioeconomic factors and increasing drug resistance patterns to be driving the escalation of these diseases. This study provides striking new insight into priority infection threats due to the large scale of participation, breadth of stakeholder experience, and wide global representation. These factors allowed us to accurately determine the consensus of a substantial component of the global infectious disease research community and share unprecedented insights from the lived experience of researchers and health workers in low resource settings. We consider these perspectives particularly valuable given the absence of biological data that concurrently assesses all infectious diseases across global regions at a single point in time. Our findings represent an important new evidence-based alarm call; the next pandemic may not be a sudden event, but a slow, 'creeping catastrophe', impacting the most impoverished regions and communities. We need to respond now, having heard these important, consistent opinions from these previously unheard and collective voices.
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.