Observational studyFrontiers in public health2025
Assessing the correlation between STAR health risk forecasts with actual health emergencies in West and Central Africa: a three-year analysis.
Observational study in Frontiers in public health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: This study evaluates the Strategic Tool for Assessing Risks (STAR), developed by the World Health Organization (WHO), for its effectiveness in predicting public health emergencies across West and Central Africa during the period 2022-2024. STAR applies a composite risk scoring system based on four dimensions likelihood, severity, vulnerability, and coping capacity to classify hazards such as measles, cholera, and meningitis into five risk categories ranging from very low to very high. Methods: Using a retrospective observational design, the study integrates quantitative outbreak data with qualitative assessments of preparedness actions across nine countries. The analysis demonstrates that STAR's predictive accuracy varies significantly by hazard and context. Results: Meningitis forecasts were consistently accurate, primarily due to the disease's strong seasonality and well-established epidemiological patterns in the African meningitis belt. In contrast, predictions for measles and cholera were less reliable, influenced by fluctuating immunization coverage, socio-political instability, and environmental factors such as water and sanitation conditions. Case studies illustrate these discrepancies: Burkina Faso's cholera risk was overestimated, resulting in zero reported cases despite a high-risk classification, while Guinea's measles outbreak closely matched STAR's high-risk prediction. The findings also highlight that effective preparedness measures, including vaccination campaigns, hygiene promotion, and cross-border coordination, can mitigate high-risk scenarios, as observed in Gabon and Burkina Faso. Key themes emerging from the analysis include STAR's strength in forecasting predictable hazards and its limitations due to static inputs and low geographic granularity. Discussion: While STAR is not a statistical forecasting model, its participatory, multi-sectoral approach provides strategic value by guiding planning, prioritization, and resource allocation for health emergency preparedness. It enables countries to optimize limited resources, prioritize highrisk hazards (scores 16-25), and implement preventive actions. Recommendations for improvement include recalibrating scoring parameters, integrating real-time surveillance and climate data, enhancing seasonality modeling, and increasing geographic resolution. When combined with dynamic data systems and collaborative efforts, STAR remains a critical strategic tool for strengthening regional public health resilience and supporting WHO's Health Emergency Framework and all-hazards preparedness planning.
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.