ArticleHealth policy and planning2026
When should a public health emergency of international concern be declared? The case of the 2018-2020 Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Article in Health policy and planning, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Criticism over the lack of transparency in the decision-making process to determine a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) has accompanied the mechanism since the category was first activated. For the 2018-2020 Ebola epidemic in North Kivu and Ituri, Democratic Republic of the Congo, this criticism intensified: it took four emergency committee (EC) meetings and nearly a year for the World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General to declare a PHEIC. The North Kivu case is emblematic of the complexities surrounding such determinations, complexities that the opacity and inconsistent application of the International Health Regulations (IHR) criteria across PHEIC history have made difficult to examine. What shaped the EC's assessment, and what does this reveal about how PHEIC determinations are made? Drawing on documentary analysis and interviews with former EC members, this paper investigates why the declaration was delayed and what shaped the EC's assessment over time. It finds that the EC's deliberations were driven by considerations that lay outside the IHR text, especially the political and operational dynamics on the ground, the financial and reputational stakes for the WHO, and the perceived risks of triggering border restrictions and deepening community resistance. How these considerations were weighed was ideationally driven, structured by the global health security paradigm that has come to shape both response interventions and the construction of certain outbreaks as matters of 'international concern'. The case carries significant implications for the credibility of the PHEIC mechanism and for the recent IHR amendments, which introduced the 'pandemic emergency' category as the highest level of global alert. By examining the interplay between real-time response dynamics and high-level decision-making, this work sheds light on the material and ideational factors that shape the governance of health emergencies, contributing to scholarly and policy debates on emergency response and agenda setting in global health.
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.