ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Measuring conflict related mortality in ten countries of the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region (2004-2024): A scoping review.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Public perceptions of mortality studies in conflict-affected areas of the Eastern Mediterranean Region: an exploratory study.Conflict and health · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Armed conflict is an important contributor to the global burden of disease through direct and indirect morbidity and mortality. Yet, reliable, up-to-date, and broadly accepted estimates of the human toll are scarce. We conducted a scoping review to map methods used to estimate conflict-related deaths in ten countries of the WHO Eastern Mediterranean region using publicly available data sources. We searched three bibliomedical and scientific databases, manually searched conflict-related death databases and government websites, and reviewed websites of key humanitarian partners. In total, 69 peer-reviewed articles (from 2004 to 2024), 23 databases, 12 government sources, and 114 nutrition and mortality survey reports (from 2004 to 2024) were included. Iraq (32/69, 46%) was the most frequently studied country in the peer-reviewed literature, followed by Syria (16/69, 23%) and Yemen (14/69, 20%). About two-thirds of the studies in the peer-reviewed literature used secondary data (45/69, 65%), frequently from passive surveillance (28/69, 41%) and were national in scope (40/69, 58%). Total number of deaths was the most reported outcome in the peer-reviewed literature (63/69, 91%), followed by crude mortality rate (22/69, 32%). In 54 out of 69 studies (78%), the first author was affiliated with an institution outside the region. Among these 54 studies, only 19 had at least one co-author affiliated with an institution from the region. Databases were mostly based on passive surveillance compiling data from media reports (14/23, 61%), humanitarian organizations (9/23, 39%) and Government sources (8/23, 35%). Nutrition and mortality surveys were based on primary data collection, mostly sub-national and in some cases surveyed more frequently countries under-represented in the peer-reviewed literature. The extensive use of databases suggests a strong interest in comparable longitudinal data on mortality in conflict settings. There may be an untapped opportunity for greater use of survey data by a wider audience.
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.