ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Event-Based Surveillance in mass gatherings: a global scoping review on effectiveness, scope, and lessons learned.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. 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.
- Shifts in primary care utilization patterns following digital health implementation: an operational evaluation of the 2023-2024 Hajj mass gatherings.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Mass gatherings (MGs) attract large populations in specific places and times ranging from religious pilgrimages and cultural festivals to international sporting events. These events can drive rapid disease transmission, cross-border spread, and strain health systems requiring robust surveillance systems to detect health threats in real time. Event-Based Surveillance (EBS) offers a proactive approach to detecting such threats through systematic detection of signals. The aim of this scoping review is to assess global experiences of EBS during MGs focusing on geographical distribution, effectiveness, strategies, scope, and identifying lessons learned. Methods: A scoping review was conducted using PRISMA-ScR 2018 checklist and the Population, Concept, Context framework. All study types without time limits were included. Searches in PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, and gray literature from WHO and CDC were screened. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts then extracted data on study characteristics, surveillance design, scope, and outcomes. Results: From 1,469 publications, 28 were included where sportive events represented 39%, religious events represented 21%, cultural and political events 7% and others (33%) covered mixed or all MGs types. Publications included 50% peer-reviewed studies, 43% gray literature and 7% theses. EBS was reported effective in 75% of studies, partially effective in 11% and unspecified in 4 (14%) with one study highlighting evaluation gaps. Most publications (64%) integrated EBS with indicator-based and/or other surveillance while 36% applied standalone EBS. Scope was infectious-disease focused in 50% of studies with fewer all-hazard applications (39%) and 11% addressed specific areas such as bioterrorism. Multisectoral collaboration was the main best practice (46%) and coordination gaps represented the leading challenge (29%). Discussion: The included literature frequently describes EBS in MGs as effective, but the evidence base is limited and standardized evaluation criteria is needed. EBS in MGs is generally effective but under-represented in research. Future priorities include strong multisectoral collaboration, integrated surveillance systems, EBS evaluation platforms development and all-hazard coverage to ensure timely detection and preparedness for international mass gatherings.
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.