ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2026
Ebola laboratory preparedness at frontline hospitals: can we or can't we?
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 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.
- Point-of-care routine laboratory testing for patients with suspected viral hemorrhagic fevers.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Frontline hospitals are required to care for patients with suspected viral hemorrhagic fever (VHF), yet guidance on laboratory preparedness remains fragmented and incomplete. We conducted a multidisciplinary risk assessment of our institutional capacity to perform routine diagnostic testing for VHF persons under investigation (PUI), focusing on the feasibility of using automated core laboratory instruments. Our assessment revealed substantial gaps between CDC guidance (which permits core lab testing) and the practical ability to implement it safely. Public health mandates for VHF preparedness have not been accompanied by granular guidance on biosafety, laboratory infrastructure, or regulatory clarity necessary for implementation. Community hospitals, which would benefit most from safely using their existing automated core laboratory instruments, lack the infrastructure, staffing expertise, and clear guidance to do so, while well-resourced tertiary centers are often best positioned to develop dedicated point-of-care testing (POCT)-based workflows. Federal and state authorities must provide explicit, validated examples of acceptable mitigation strategies for testing using core lab instrumentation and reconcile conflicting recommendations across guidance documents. Without such authoritative clarity, frontline hospitals cannot confidently meet their mandated VHF preparedness obligations.
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.