http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2315-5390
Figures
Abstract
The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic analysis of the reporting quality of the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak in West Africa from 2014–2018 using the Modified STROBE statement. We included studies on the 2014 EVD outbreak alone, limited to those on human patients in Africa. We searched the following databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science) for outbreak reports published between 2014–2018. We assessed factors potentially associated with the quality of reporting. A total of 69 of 131 (53%) articles within the full-text review fulfilled our eligibility criteria and underwent the Modified STROBE assessment for analyzing the quality of reporting. The Modified STROBE scores of the included studies ranged from 11–26 points and the mean was found to be 19.54 out of 30 with a standard deviation (SD) of ± 4.30. The top three reported Modified STROBE components were descriptive characteristics of study participants, scientific background and evidence rational, and clinical significance of observations. More than 75% of the studies met a majority of the criteria in the Modified STROBE assessment tool. Information that was commonly missing included addressing potential source of bias, sensitivity analysis, further results/analysis such as risk estimates and odds ratios, presence of a flowchart, and addressing missing data. In multivariable analysis, peer-reviewed publication was the only predictor that remained significantly associated with a higher Modified STROBE score. In conclusion, the large range of Modified STROBE scores observed indicates variability in the quality of outbreak reports for EVD. The review identified strong reporting in some areas, whereas other areas are in need of improvement, in particular providing an important description of the outbreak setting and identifying any external elements (potential biases and confounding factors) that could hinder the credibility of the findings.
Citation: Huynh N, Baumann A, Loeb M (2019) Reporting quality of the 2014 Ebola outbreak in Africa: A systematic analysis. PLoS ONE 14(6): e0218170. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218170
Editor: John Schieffelin, Tulane University, UNITED STATES
Received: October 23, 2018; Accepted: May 28, 2019; Published: June 25, 2019
Copyright: © 2019 Huynh et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: Dr. Loeb is supported by a CIHR Foundation Grant.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Since 1976, Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) has persisted as a rare and deadly illness that has caused socioeconomic disruptions worldwide due to a fatality rate ranging from 25% to 90% in previous outbreaks[1]. Notably, the 2014–2015 epidemic in Africa severely impacted Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia and was 11 times larger than all of the past outbreaks combined [2]. Numerous studies have demonstrated that many affected countries were ill-equipped to handle the magnitude of the 2014 epidemic because they lacked the clinical capacity and resources; inadequate funds were invested into the public health system; and surveillance systems were poorly governed[3–5].
Outbreaks like these are commonly reported as descriptive observational studies which include case reports, surveillance, and cross-sectional studies to evaluate infection control interventions[6]. High-quality informative reports are interpreted as containing all of the necessary documentation about the relevant study (e.g. outbreak location, pathogen type, number of individuals exposed and infected). This information can act as the fundamental source of epidemiological data for assessing the health of populations; determining how outbreaks can be managed; and improving prevention measures of communicable diseases[7,8].
A movement towards better reporting standards began in the 1990’s with the development of evidence-based medicine due to the recognition that inadequate reporting potentially leads to ineffective healthcare policies and/or treatments, putting patients at risk of adverse effects[9]. Since then, guidelines have been written for many different types of studies to increase the clarity in reporting and credibility of published literature[10]. Examples of standardized guidelines include: CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials)[11], QUOROM (for meta-analyses of randomized trials)[12], STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology)[13, 14], and REMARK (Reporting Recommendations for Tumour Marker Prognostic Studies)[15]. Despite the progress made toward higher-quality reporting, recent literature demonstrates that major methodological weaknesses still exist[16–26].
On a global scale, scientists have assessed the reporting quality of outbreaks without the use of a standardized guideline where quality has been graded based on the consistency and completeness of data collected. Examples of this include the study on compiling the world’s first worldwide database on nosocomial outbreak[27] and the evaluation of Foot-and-Mouth Disease outbreaks in mainland South-East Asia from 2000 to 2010[28]. This led to a review where the newly developed Modified STROBE statement approach was used to systematically assess the quality of Influenza outbreak reports[29]. Compared to the original STROBE criteria, a 22-item checklist[13,14], the Modified STROBE assessment tool has additional criteria that includes outbreak characterization, location, and organization of patient data.
Currently, no studies have evaluated the caliber of reporting outbreaks for EVD, demonstrating the novelty of this review[30–33]. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic analysis of the reporting quality of the EVD outbreak in West Africa from 2014–2018 using the Modified STROBE statement.
Methods
Eligibility criteria
We included studies on the 2014 EVD outbreak alone, limited to those on human patients in Africa. In addition, eligible reports needed to describe one or more of the following: onset of the outbreak; clinical manifestations; and control measures of specific diagnostic testing. Although outbreak reports that met our inclusion criteria could have conducted transmission modelling, we excluded studies that were not outbreak reports but only transmission models. Randomized trials and intervention studies were also excluded from the review because they did not include components of outbreak reports.
Search strategy and data collection
We searched the following databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science) for outbreak reports published between 2014–2018 using the combination of search terms seen in the Table in S1 Table. The search strategy used is described in Fig 1.
Quality assessment
The Modified STROBE (a 30-item assessment tool that relates to the title/abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion of articles) was used to effectively analyze key factors of outbreak reporting[32]. The methods section is further divided into components that correspond to outbreak characteristics; outbreak setting; and organization of patient data to systematically analyze the quality of reporting. Data was extracted from each outbreak report based on the criteria within the Modified STROBE statement, where each individual component is given a worth of one point. A total score (i.e. completeness of reporting) out of 30 points was assigned for each outbreak report as indicated in the S2 Table. The 69 articles included in the review were analyzed by one researcher who has experience using critical appraisal techniques.
To analyze the proportion of articles that accurately met key component of the Modified STROBE checklist, a post-hoc assessment was performed. We identified the following items to be fundamental in an outbreak report: present key elements of study design early in report (3A); case definitions for outbreaks were included (3G); provide eligibility criteria for selection of cases, participants and/or controls (3J); describe any efforts to address potential sources of bias (3L); and give characteristics of study participants (4B).
Predictor variables
To assess factors potentially associated with the quality of reporting (i.e. Modified STROBE score), the following predictor variables were selected for assessment prior to the study: publication year, author affiliation (academic institution vs. non-academic [e.g. public health agencies, non-governmental organizations]), publication type (peer-reviewed vs. epidemiological report), and outbreak setting (hospital vs. community). We treated publication year as a binary variable, that is, either prior to after the year 2015, due to the substantial amount of outbreak reports published following the outbreak in Africa. Furthermore, we hypothesized that authors obtaining support from public health officials led to higher quality reports. Author affiliation was determined by the first author. In the case that the outbreak report involved authors from public health and academic institutions, the second author determined the author affiliation. Similarly, we predicted that higher quality reports were from peer-reviewed articles and we sought to observe if this is true. On a similar note, we projected that outbreaks that took place at hospitals were reported more accurately compared to those in the community.
Statistical analysis
We used descriptive statistics to summarize the results of the Modified STROBE scores. For the univariate analysis, a two-tailed t-test was conducted to determine significant predictor variables with p-value <0.05. In terms of the multivariable analysis, a backward stepwise linear regression model was applied to analyze predictor variables associated with better reporting quality. This was done by eliminating non-significant covariates one by one using 5% significance until a final model was obtained. All statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 25 (SPSS Inc., Armonk, NY, USA).
Reliability and validity tests
A Cronbach’s alpha test was conducted to measure reliability or internal consistency for the Modified STROBE assessment tool. To measure construct validity, a convergent correlation test was carried out. All the included articles (n = 69) were first critically assessed using the ORION (Outbreak Reports and Intervention studies of Nosocomial infection) statement[6], a 22-item checklist that has a similar outbreak investigation guideline to the Modified STROBE tool. The empirical relationship between the Modified STROBE scores and the scores obtained from using the ORION statement was compared through a bivariate Pearson analysis.
Results
Quality assessment
A total of 69 of 131 (53%) articles within the full-text review fulfilled our eligibility criteria and underwent the Modified STROBE assessment for analyzing the quality of reporting [34–102].
The Modified STROBE scores of the included studies ranged from 11–26 points and the mean was found to be 19.54 out of 30 with a standard deviation (SD) of ± 4.30. The distribution of scores is shown in S1 Fig. As indicated in Table 1, all reports provided quantitative data on infected individuals (2C) such as the reported number of suspected and confirmed patients. In terms of frequently reported Modified STROBE components, the top three items commonly reported were: descriptive characteristics of study participants (4B), scientific background and evidence rational (2A), and clinical significance of observations (5A). More than 75% of the studies met majority of the criteria in the Modified STROBE assessment tool. However, information that was commonly missing included: addressing potential source of bias (3L), sensitivity analysis (3O), further results/analysis such as risk estimates and odds ratios (4E), presence of a flowchart (4A), and addressing missing data (3N)(Table 1).
In regard to the post-hoc assessment, majority of papers satisfied four of the five key components within the Modified STROBE checklist. The only criteria that was commonly missed was describe any efforts to address potential sources of bias (3L), as only two reports sufficiently mentioned this information (Table 2).
Factors associated with high-quality reporting
Three variables (publication year, journal type, and author affiliation), were found to be significantly associated with a higher Modified STROBE score in the univariate analysis (Table 3).
Of the 69 reports included, 25(35%) were published from 2016 to 2018 (i.e. >2015) (S2 Table). These had significantly higher Modified STROBE scores compared to reports published prior to 2015(i.e. ≤2015) (MD 3.61, 95% Cl 1.81–5.41, P = <0.001). We found that 46 (67%) of the studies that were peer-reviewed publications had significantly higher scores in comparison to non-peer reviewed public health epidemiological reports (MD 5.83, 95% Cl 4.13–7.52, P = <0.001). Similarly, 23(33%) of the included outbreak reports did not have any affiliation with public health agencies. We observed significantly higher scores from reports published through academic institutions, in contrast to public health agencies (MD 2.78, Cl 95% 0.83–4.74, P = 0.01). The final predictor, outbreak setting (hospital vs. community) was not found to be a significant predictor for higher Modified STROBE score (P = 0.174).
In the multivariable analysis, peer-reviewed publication was the only predictor that remained significantly associated with a higher Modified STROBE score (P = 0.001).
Reliability and validity tests
The Cronbach’s alpha test was calculated to be 0.771 and the correlation coefficient value from the convergent validity analysis was found to be 0.832. This demonstrates a strong positive correlation value, indicating the critical appraisal tool measures what it is intended to and has high construct validity.
Discussion
The main finding from this study was that of the 69 articles assessed, the reports on average met only a modest number of criteria (66%) within the Modified STROBE assessment tool. The total Modified score out of 30 points ranged from 11 to 26. We also found in the multivariable analysis that peer-reviewed articles were associated with a significantly higher Modified STROBE score in comparison to epidemiological reports. To assist in the interpretation of this analysis, it is fundamental to note that we analyzed the completeness of reporting through the total Modified STROBE score and not methodological quality. Hence, items were recorded based on sufficient information to conduct appraisal.
Certain items on the Modified STROBE assessment tool such as sensitivity analysis(3O), may not be necessary for some studies, based on their objective which explains the fact that only a moderate number were met. Items within the Modified STROBE that are considered crucial for reports include outbreak characteristics and description of outbreak location as the inclusion of this information will assist in future outbreak management. The criteria that was commonly missed within the key Modified STROBE components was the identification to address potential sources of bias (3L).
It is not surprising that peer-reviewed articles were found to be associated with higher Modified STROBE scores. A 2015 survey done by publishing research consortium demonstrated that 82% of researchers agreed that the peer-review process is pivotal to the control of scientific communication and improving the quality of published literature[103]. Thus, journal requirements play a fundamental role in the dissemination of research. The peer-review process and the use of reporting guideline requirements are expected to improve the quality of research. Hence, it is highly recommended authors submit papers to journals who have a peer-review process in place in order to improve the quality of manuscripts.
Two predictor variables (publication date and author affiliation) were found to have superior Modified STROBE scores when assessed respectively as an independent predictor but not in the multivariate regression model. The most obvious explanation for publication date is that reports published after 2015 had the time and data advantage. In addition, it is important to note that 23 out of 25(92%) of the articles post 2015 were peer-reviewed and did not contain any public health affiliation. This may have acted as a confounding factor and was accounted for in our multivariate analysis. In regard to author affiliation, there could be multiple factors that influence the reason why academic institutions was found to be associated with a higher Modified STROBE score, for instance funding availability, abiding by institutional regulations, and academic capacity and training.
This is the second time the Modified STROBE assessment tool has been used to evaluate the reporting quality of outbreaks; Lo et al[29] was the first to utilize the appraisal tool for influenza outbreaks. Similar to our findings, Lo et al[29] stated that very few reports provided crucial information on patient characteristics and addressing limitations that could potentially bias the findings. As well, our mean Modified STROBE score (19.54) was similar to their study[29], indicating a new potential trend of excluding fundamental outbreak characteristics may be seen in similar pathogen outbreaks. This not only suggests the generalizability of our modified assessment tool towards other pathogens and outbreak settings, it also reiterated the demand for explicit reporting guidelines for outbreak reports.
One strength of this study is that the reliability and validity test indicated that the Modified STROBE assessment tool was an appropriate instrument to measure the quality of reporting outbreaks. The Cronbach’s alpha test was found to be 0.771, which is within the acceptable range of 0.70–0.90 as demonstrated by various studies[104–106]. This indicates that all the items within the critical appraisal tool are interrelated and measure the same construct. The convergent validity test showed a high positive correlation between the two appraisal tools, ORION and Modified STROBE (correlation coefficient of 0.832), which indicates high construct validity and strengthens the application of this instrument for future use[107,108]. Other strengths of this review include an extensive search strategy and a methodology approach based on the STROBE statement, which has been published in over 122 journals[13,14]. The International Committee of Medical Journal editors have endorsed the STROBE statement as a universal requirement for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals[13,14]. In addition, conducting a backward stepwise regression model reduces the risk of multicollinearity and overfitting, which are frequently seen in this type of analysis[109–111].
We acknowledge that one limitation of our paper was that we did not include an assessment of the gray literature. This remains an important gap in the academic analysis of outbreak management. We would encourage investigators of outbreaks to develop standardized data fields and additional resources to support data collection that could would facilitate bringing investigations to publications. The Health Internetwork Access to Research Initiative is an example of an initiative developed by the WHO and biomedical healthcare journals to allow complementary or low priced online access to key biomedical journals for developing countries[112–114]. Equally as important to increasing access to health research is containing an efficient number of trained personnel to document and facilitate the post hoc analysis. Thus, we recommend once an outbreak has been reported, mobilized teams should contain trained personnel to assist in data collection. Public health agencies should also be encouraged to publish their results as an expectation of their role in data sharing. In addition, restricting studies to the use of only English text, and narrowing the scope to countries in only one continent (Africa), may not be an accurate comprehensive representation of outbreaks reports. On a similar note, it was difficult to distinguish mutual exclusivity between comparison groups for author affiliation based on first corresponding author. In the review, 46 (67%) of the included articles had affiliations with both academic institutions and public health organizations. It is also important to emphasize that the resources available for reporting outbreaks have not been considered in this analysis.
Outbreaks are a complex situation and multiple external environmental factors–resource availability, public and political climate, response coordination, and development of a skilled workforce—not only directly impact the quality of research collected, but contributes to the spread of the EVD epidemic [3–5]. This clarifies the difficulty in executing routine laboratory analytics and the substantial number of reports with missing data. Hence, this is why it is important to prioritize data collection during an outbreak response. It is clear that there were great challenges in investigating EVD outbreaks and in such circumstances it can be impossible to meet reporting standards. The purpose of this paper is not to disparage those investigators but to draw attention to the need for adequate resources both for outbreak investigation and for reporting.
In summary, the large range of Modified STROBE scores observed indicates the variability in the quality of outbreak reports for EVD. The review identified strong reporting in some areas, whereas other areas are in need of improvement, in particular providing an important description of the outbreak setting and identifying any external elements (potential biases and confounding factors) that could hinder the credibility of the findings. This review acts as a call of action for international organizations (global public health corporations, academic institutions, national non-government agencies) to extend support towards standardizing outbreak reporting, prioritizing data collection, and increasing field epidemiology training programs in developing countries. The Centre for Disease Control’s Field Epidemiology program has shown to be an effective approach towards training residents in developing countries to analyze, collect, and interpret disease information [115]. The adaption of the Modified STROBE checklist to this program could enhance sound infection control policies, leading to better reporting outcomes in the future. Several systematic reviews have documented the positive impacts reporting guidelines have had on quality of reporting, demonstrating the potential effects of the Modified STROBE checklist [116–120]. Therefore, better adherence to the Modified STROBE would increase clarity to research findings, facilitate evidence-informed planning towards future outbreak management, and ultimately aid in the synthesis of policy and practice.
Supporting information
S1 Table. Modified STROBE scores for individual outbreak reports (n = 69)34-102.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218170.s001
(DOCX)
S2 Table. Key Word search strategy in MEDLINE/EMBASE/Web of Science in April 2018†.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218170.s002
(DOCX)
S1 Fig. Distribution of Modified STROBE score for the 69 outbreak reports.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218170.s003
(TIF)
References
- 1.
Who.int. WHO Ebola Virus Disease. 2018 [cited 19 June 2018]. http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ebola-virus-disease
- 2.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cost of the Ebola Epidemic. 2016 [cited 19 June 2018]. https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/history/2014-2016-outbreak/cost-of-ebola.html
- 3. Shoman H, Karafillakis E, Rawaf S. The link between the West African Ebola outbreak and health systems in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone: a systematic review. Globalization and health. 2017 Dec;13(1):1. pmid:28049495
- 4. Brolin Ribacke KJ, Saulnier DD, Eriksson A, von Schreeb J. Effects of the West Africa Ebola virus disease on health-care utilization–a systematic review. Frontiers in public health. 2016 Oct 10;4:222. pmid:27777926
- 5. Cancedda C, Davis SM, Dierberg KL, Lascher J, Kelly JD, Barrie MB, Koroma AP, George P, Kamara AA, Marsh R, Sumbuya MS. Strengthening health systems while responding to a health crisis: lessons learned by a nongovernmental organization during the Ebola virus disease epidemic in Sierra Leone. The Journal of infectious diseases. 2016 Oct 4;214(suppl_3):S153–63. pmid:27688219
- 6. Stone SP, Cooper BS, Kibbler CC, Cookson BD, Robert JA, Medley GF, Duckworth G, Lai R, Ebrahim S, Brown EM, Wiffen PJ. The ORION statement: a CONSORT equivalent for infection control studies–Guidelines for transparent reporting of Outbreak Reports and Intervention studies Of Nosocomial infection. Journal of Infection. 2007 Sep 1;55(3):e89.
- 7. Grimes DA, Schulz KF. Descriptive studies: what they can and cannot do. The Lancet. 2002 Jan 12;359(9301):145–9.
- 8. Sanderson S, Tatt ID, Higgins J. Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography. International journal of epidemiology. 2007 Jun 1;36(3):666–76 pmid:17470488
- 9. Claridge JA, Fabian TC. History and development of evidence–based medicine. World journal of surgery. 2005 May 1;29(5):547–53. pmid:15827845
- 10. Vandenbroucke JP. Strega, Strobe, Stard, Squire, Moose, Prisma, Gnosis, Trend, Orion, Coreq, Quorom, Remark… and Consort: for whom does the guideline toll?. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2009 Jun 1;62(6):594–6. pmid:19181482
- 11. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG (2001) The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel–group randomized trials. Lancet 357: 1191–1194. pmid:11323066
- 12. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, et al. (1999) Improving the quality of reports of meta–analyses of randomized controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta–analyses. Lancet 354: 1896–1900 pmid:10584742
- 13. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, Strobe Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. PLOS medicine. 2007 Oct 16;4(10):e296. pmid:17941714
- 14. Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Mulrow CD, Pocock SJ, Poole C, Schlesselman JJ, Egger M; STROBE Initiative. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Epidemiology. 2007 Nov;18(6):805–35. pmid:18049195
- 15. McShane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, Taube SE, Gion M, et al. (2005) REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK). Br J Cancer 93: 387–391 pmid:16106245
- 16. Chan AW, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting of randomized trials published in PubMed journals. The Lancet. 2005 Mar 26;365(9465):1159–62.
- 17. Gibson CA, Kirk EP, LeCheminant JD, Bailey BW, Huang G, Donnelly JE. Reporting quality of randomized trials in the diet and exercise literature for weight loss. BMC medical research methodology. 2005 Dec;5(1):9.
- 18. Hayden JA, Côté P, Bombardier C. Evaluation of the quality of prognosis studies in systematic reviews. Annals of internal medicine. 2006 Mar 21;144(6):427–37. pmid:16549855
- 19. Latronico N, Botteri M, Minelli C, Zanotti C, Bertolini G, Candiani A. Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in the intensive care literature. Intensive care medicine. 2002 Sep 1;28(9):1316–23. pmid:12209283
- 20. Lee CW, Chi KN. The standard of reporting of health–related quality of life in clinical cancer trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2000 May 1;53(5):451–8. pmid:10812316
- 21. Long CR, Nick TG, Kao C. Original research published in the chiropractic literature: Evaluation of the research report. Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics. 2004 May 1;27(4):223–8.
- 22. Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Halligan S, Hopewell S, Cornelius V, Altman DG. Systematic reviews of diagnostic tests in cancer: review of methods and reporting. Bmj. 2006 Aug 24;333(7565):413. pmid:16849365
- 23. Mills E, Loke YK, Wu P, Montori VM, Perri D, Moher D, Guyatt G. Determining the reporting quality of RCTs in clinical pharmacology. British journal of clinical pharmacology. 2004 Jul 1;58(1):61–5. pmid:15206994
- 24. Riley RD, Abrams KR, Sutton AJ, Lambert PC, Jones DR, Heney D, Burchill SA. Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence–based practice in the future. British Journal of Cancer. 2003 Apr 15;88(8):1191. pmid:12698183
- 25. Smidt N, Rutjes AW, van der Windt DA, Ostelo RW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies. Radiology. 2005 May;235(2):347–53. pmid:15770041
- 26. Thakur A, Wang EC, Chiu TT, Chen W, Ko CY, Chang JT, Atkinson JB, Fonkalsrud EW, Grosfeld JL. Methodology standards associated with quality reporting in clinical studies in pediatric surgery journals. Journal of pediatric surgery. 2001 Aug 1;36(8):1160–4. pmid:11479847
- 27. Vonberg RP, Weitzel–Kage D, Behnke M, Gastmeier P. Worldwide Outbreak Database: the largest collection of nosocomial outbreaks. Infection. 2011 Feb 1;39(1):29–34. pmid:21153042
- 28. Madin B. An evaluation of Foot–and–Mouth Disease outbreak reporting in mainland South–East Asia from 2000 to 2010. Preventive veterinary medicine. 2011 Dec 1;102(3):230–41. pmid:21889809
- 29. Lo C, Mertz D, Loeb M. Assessing the reporting quality of influenza outbreaks in the community. Influenza and other respiratory viruses. 2017 Nov 1;11(6):556–63. pmid:29054122
- 30. Pocock SJ, Collier TJ, Dandreo KJ, de Stavola BL, Goldman MB, Kalish LA, Kasten LE, McCormack VA. Issues in the reporting of epidemiological studies: a survey of recent practice. BmJ. 2004 Oct 14;329(7471):883. pmid:15469946
- 31. Cooper BS, Stone SP, Kibbler CC, et al. Systematic review of isolation policies in the hospital management of methicillin–resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a review of the literature with epidemiological and economic modelling. Health Technol Assess 2003;7:1 194.
- 32. Ramsay C, Brown E, Hartman G, Davey P. Room for improvement: a systematic review of the quality of evaluations of interventions to improve hospital antibiotic prescribing. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003;52:764 771. pmid:14563901
- 33. Davey P, Brown E, Hartman G, et al. Interventions to improve antibiotic prescribing practices for hospital in patients. Cochrane Library: CD003543. 2005. 5 [Issue 1]
- 34. Furuse Y, Fallah M, Oshitani H, Kituyi L, Mahmoud N, Musa E, Gasasira A, Nyenswah T, Dahn B, Bawo L. Analysis of patient data from laboratories during the Ebola virus disease outbreak in Liberia, April 2014 to March 2015. PLOS neglected tropical diseases. 2017 Jul 21;11(7):e0005804. pmid:28732038
- 35. Muoghalu IS, Moses F, Conteh I, Swaray P, Ajudua A, Nordström A. The Transmission chain analysis of 2014–2015 Ebola Virus Disease Outbreak in Koinadugu District, sierra leone: an Observational study. Frontiers in public health. 2017 Jul 10;5:160. pmid:28740846
- 36. Haaskjold YL, Bolkan HA, Krogh KØ, Jongopi J, Lundeby KM, Mellesmo S, Garcés PS, Jøsendal O, Øpstad Å, Svensen E, Fuentes LM. Clinical features of and risk factors for fatal Ebola virus disease, Moyamba District, Sierra Leone, December 2014–February 2015. Emerging infectious diseases. 2016 Sep;22(9):1537. pmid:27268303
- 37. Schieffelin JS, Shaffer JG, Goba A, Gbakie M, Gire SK, Colubri A, Sealfon RS, Kanneh L, Moigboi A, Momoh M, Fullah M. Clinical illness and outcomes in patients with Ebola in Sierra Leone. New England journal of medicine. 2014 Nov 27;371(22):2092–100. pmid:25353969
- 38. Hunt L, Gupta–Wright A, Simms V, Tamba F, Knott V, Tamba K, Heisenberg–Mansaray S, Tamba E, Conteh S, Smith T, Tobin S. Clinical presentation, biochemical, and haematological parameters and their association with outcome in patients with Ebola virus disease: an observational cohort study. The Lancet infectious diseases. 2015 Nov 1;15(11):1292–9. pmid:26271406
- 39. Bah EI, Lamah MC, Fletcher T, Jacob ST, Brett–Major DM, Sall AA, Shindo N, Fischer WA, Lamontagne F, Saliou SM, Bausch DG. Clinical presentation of patients with Ebola virus disease in Conakry, Guinea. New England Journal of Medicine. 2015 Jan 1;372(1):40–7. pmid:25372658
- 40. Reaves EJ, Mabande LG, Thoroughman DA, Arwady MA, Montgomery JM. Control of Ebola virus disease—Firestone District, Liberia, 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 Oct 24;63(42):959–65. pmid:25340914
- 41. Nyenswah T, Fallah M, Sieh S, Kollie K, Badio M, Gray A, Dilah P, Shannon M, Duwor S, Ihekweazu C, Cordier–Lassalle T. Controlling the last known cluster of Ebola virus disease–Liberia, January–February 2015. MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report. 2015 May;64(18):500–4. pmid:25974635
- 42. Lindblade KA, Kateh F, Nagbe TK, Neatherlin JC, Pillai SK, Attfield KR, Dweh E, Barradas DT, Williams SG, Blackley DJ, Kirking HL. Decreased Ebola transmission after rapid response to outbreaks in remote areas, Liberia, 2014. Emerging infectious diseases. 2015 Oct;21(10):1800. pmid:26402477
- 43. Shultz JM, Espinel Z, Espinola M, Rechkemmer A. Distinguishing epidemiological features of the 2013–2016 West Africa Ebola virus disease outbreak. Disaster health. 2016 Jul 2;3(3):78–88. pmid:28229017
- 44. Nyenswah T, Fahnbulleh M, Massaquoi M, Nagbe T, Bawo L, Falla JD, Kohar H, Gasasira A, Nabeth P, Yett S, Gergonne B. Ebola epidemic—Liberia, March–October 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 Nov 21;63(46):1082–6. pmid:25412068
- 45. Victory KR, Coronado F, Ifono SO, Soropogui T, Dahl BA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Ebola transmission linked to a single traditional funeral ceremony—Kissidougou, Guinea, December, 2014–January 2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Apr 17;64(14):386–8. pmid:25879897
- 46. Dixon MG, Schafer IJ. Ebola viral disease outbreak—West Africa, 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 Jun 27;63(25):548–51. pmid:24964881
- 47. WHO Ebola Response Team. Ebola virus disease among children in West Africa. New England Journal of Medicine. 2015 Mar 26;372(13):1274–7.
- 48. Incident Management System Ebola Epidemiology Team, CDC, Guinea Interministerial Committee for Response Against the Ebola Virus, World Health Organization, CDC Guinea Response Team, Liberia Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, CDC Liberia Response Team, Sierra Leone Ministry of Health and Sanitation, CDC Sierra Leone Response Team, Viral Special Pathogens Branch, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC. Update: Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic—West Africa, December 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 Dec 19;63(50):1199–201. pmid:25522088
- 49. Grinnell M, Dixon MG, Patton M, Fitter D, Bilivogui P, Johnson C, Dotson E, Diallo B, Rodier G, Raghunathan P. Ebola Virus Disease in Health Care Workers–Guinea, 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Oct 2;64(38):1083–7. pmid:26421761
- 50. Maganga GD, Kapetshi J, Berthet N, Kebela Ilunga B, Kabange F, Mbala Kingebeni P, Mondonge V, Muyembe JJ, Bertherat E, Briand S, Cabore J. Ebola virus disease in the Democratic Republic of Congo. New England Journal of Medicine. 2014 Nov 27;371(22):2083–91. pmid:25317743
- 51. WHO Ebola Response Team. Ebola virus disease in West Africa—the first 9 months of the epidemic and forward projections. New England Journal of Medicine. 2014 Oct 16;371(16):1481–95. pmid:25244186
- 52. Shuaib F, Gunnala R, Musa EO, Mahoney FJ, Oguntimehin O, Nguku PM, Nyanti SB, Knight N, Gwarzo NS, Idigbe O, Nasidi A. Ebola virus disease outbreak–Nigeria, July–September 2014. MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report. 2014 Oct;63(39):867–72. pmid:25275332
- 53. Incident Management System Ebola Epidemiology Team, CDC, Guinea Interministerial Committee for Response Against the Ebola Virus, CDC Guinea Response Team, Liberia Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, CDC Liberia Response Team, Sierra Leone Ministry of Health and Sanitation, CDC Sierra Leone Response Team, Viral Special Pathogens Branch, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC. Update: Ebola Virus Disease Outbreak—West Africa, October 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 Oct 31;63(43):978–81. pmid:25356606
- 54. Hersey S, Martel LD, Jambai A, Keita S, Yoti Z, Meyer E, Seeman S, Bennett S, Ratto J, Morgan O, Akyeampong MA. Ebola virus disease—Sierra Leone and Guinea, August 2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Sep 11;64(35):981–4. pmid:26355422
- 55. Folarin OA, Ehichioya D, Schaffner SF, Winnicki SM, Wohl S, Eromon P, West KL, Gladden–Young A, Oyejide NE, Matranga CB, Deme AB. Ebola virus epidemiology and evolution in Nigeria. The Journal of infectious diseases. 2016 Oct 4;214(suppl_3):S102–9. pmid:27377746
- 56. Lu HJ, Qian J, Kargbo D, Zhang XG, Yang F, Hu Y, Sun Y, Cao YX, Deng YQ, Su HX, Dafae F. Ebola virus outbreak investigation, Sierra Leone, September 28–November 11, 2014. Emerging infectious diseases. 2015 Nov;21(11):1921. pmid:26485317
- 57. Kouadio KI, Clement P, Bolongei J, Tamba A, Gasasira AN, Warsame A, Okeibunor JC, Ota MO, Tamba B, Gumede N, Shaba K. Epidemiological and surveillance response to Ebola virus disease outbreak in Lofa County, Liberia (March–September, 2014); lessons learned. PLoS currents. 2015 May 6;7.
- 58. Wang L, Yang G, Jia L, Li Z, Xie J, Li P, Qiu S, Hao R, Wu Z, Ma H, Song H. Epidemiological features and trends of Ebola virus disease in West Africa. International Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2015 Sep 1;38:52–3. pmid:26216765
- 59. Musa EO, Adedire E, Adeoye O, Adewuyi P, Waziri N, Nguku P, Nanjuya M, Adebayo B, Fatiregun A, Enya B, Ohuabunwo C. Epidemiological profile of the Ebola virus disease outbreak in Nigeria, July–September 2014. Pan African Medical Journal. 2015;21(1).
- 60. Ministries of Health of Guinea S, Leone L. Ebola virus disease outbreak–West Africa, September 2014. MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report. 2014 Oct 3;63(39):865. pmid:25275331
- 61. Rico A, Brody D, Coronado F, Rondy M, Fiebig L, Carcelen A, Deyde VM, Mesfin S, Retzer KD, Bilivogui P, Keita S. Epidemiology of epidemic Ebola virus disease in Conakry and surrounding prefectures, Guinea, 2014–2015. Emerging infectious diseases. 2016 Feb;22(2):178. pmid:26812047
- 62. Lamunu M, Olu OO, Bangura J, Yoti Z, Samba TT, Kargbo DK, Dafae FM, Raja MA, Sempira N, Ivan ML, Sing A. epidemiology of ebola Virus Disease in the Western area region of sierra leone, 2014–2015. Frontiers in public health. 2017 Mar 2;5:33. pmid:28303239
- 63. Gleason B, Redd J, Kilmarx P, Sesay T, Bayor F, Mozalevskis A, Connolly A, Akpablie J, Prybylski D, Moffett D, King M. Establishment of an Ebola treatment unit and laboratory—Bombali District, Sierra Leone, July 2014–January 2015. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Oct 9;64(39):1108–.
- 64. Fitzgerald F, Naveed A, Wing K, Gbessay M, Ross JC, Checchi F, Youkee D, Jalloh MB, Baion D, Mustapha A, Jah H. Ebola virus disease in children, Sierra Leone, 2014–2015. Emerging infectious diseases. 2016 Oct;22(10):1769. pmid:27649367
- 65. Sharma A, Heijenberg N, Peter C, Bolongei J, Reeder B, Alpha T, Sterk E, Robert H, Kurth A, Cannas A, Bocquin A. Evidence for a decrease in transmission of Ebola virus—Lofa County, Liberia, June 8–November 1, 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 Nov 21;63(46):1067–71. pmid:25412065
- 66. Nyenswah TG, Westercamp M, Kamali AA, Qin J, Zielinski–Gutierrez E, Amegashie F, Fallah M, Gergonne B, Nugba–Ballah R, Singh G, Aberle–Grasse JM. Evidence for declining numbers of Ebola cases—Montserrado County, Liberia, June–October 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 Nov 21;63(46):1072–6. pmid:25412066
- 67. Skrable K, Roshania R, Mallow M, Wolfman V, Siakor M, Levine AC. The natural history of acute Ebola Virus Disease among patients managed in five Ebola treatment units in West Africa: A retrospective cohort study. PLoS neglected tropical diseases. 2017 Jul 19;11(7):e0005700. pmid:28723900
- 68. Richardson ET, Kelly JD, Barrie MB, Mesman AW, Karku S, Quiwa K, Marsh RH, Koedoyoma S, Daboh F, Barron KP, Grady M. Minimally symptomatic infection in an Ebola ‘hotspot’: a cross–sectional serosurvey. PLoS neglected tropical diseases. 2016 Nov 15;10(11):e0005087. pmid:27846221
- 69. Valencia C, Bah H, Fatoumata B, Rodier G, Diallo B, Koné M, Giese C, Conde L, Malano E, Mollet T, Jansa J. Network visualization for outbreak response: Mapping the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) chains of transmission in N’Zérékoré, Guinea. Journal of Infection. 2017 Mar 1;74(3):294–301. pmid:27840270
- 70. Kateh F, Nagbe T, Kieta A, Barskey A, Gasasira AN, Driscoll A, Tucker A, Christie A, Karmo B, Scott C, Bowah C. Rapid response to Ebola outbreaks in remote areas–Liberia, July–November 2014. MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report. 2015 Feb;64(7):188–92. pmid:25719682
- 71. Lokuge K, Caleo G, Greig J, Duncombe J, McWilliam N, Squire J, Lamin M, Veltus E, Wolz A, Kobinger G, de la Vega MA. Successful control of Ebola virus disease: analysis of service based data from rural Sierra Leone. PLoS neglected tropical diseases. 2016 Mar 9;10(3):e0004498. pmid:26959413
- 72. Ajelli M, Parlamento S, Bome D, Kebbi A, Atzori A, Frasson C, Putoto G, Carraro D, Merler S. The 2014 Ebola virus disease outbreak in Pujehun, Sierra Leone: epidemiology and impact of interventions. BMC medicine. 2015 Dec;13(1):281.
- 73. Stehling–Ariza T, Rosewell A, Moiba SA, Yorpie BB, Ndomaina KD, Jimissa KS, Leidman E, Rijken DJ, Basler C, Wood J, Manso D. The impact of active surveillance and health education on an Ebola virus disease cluster—Kono District, Sierra Leone, 2014–2015. BMC infectious diseases. 2016 Dec;16(1):611. pmid:27784275
- 74. Fasina FO, Shittu A, Lazarus D, Tomori O, Simonsen L, Viboud C, Chowell G. Transmission dynamics and control of Ebola virus disease outbreak in Nigeria, July to September 2014. Eurosurveillance. 2014 Oct 9;19(40):20920. pmid:25323076
- 75. Incident Management System Ebola Epidemiology Team, CDC, Guinea Interministerial Committee for Response Against the Ebola Virus and the World Health Organization, CDC Guinea Response Team, Liberia Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, CDC Liberia Response Team, Sierra Leone Ministry of Health and Sanitation, CDC Sierra Leone Response Team, Viral Special Pathogens Branch, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC. Update: Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic—West Africa, November 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 Nov 21;63(46):1064–6. pmid:25412064
- 76. Alpren C. Ebola Virus Disease Cluster—Northern Sierra Leone, January 2016. MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report. 2016;65.
- 77. Arranz J, Lundeby KM, Hassan S, Fuentes LM, Garcés PS, Haaskjold YL, Bolkan HA, Krogh KØ, Jongopi J, Mellesmo S, Jøsendal O. Clinical features of suspected Ebola cases referred to the Moyamba ETC, Sierra Leone: challenges in the later stages of the 2014 outbreak. BMC infectious diseases. 2016 Dec;16(1):308.
- 78. Cherif MS, Koonrungsesomboon N, Diallo MP, Le Gall E, Kassé D, Cherif F, Koné A, Diakité M, Camara F, Magassouba N. The predictor of mortality outcome in adult patients with Ebola virus disease during the 2014–2015 outbreak in Guinea. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases. 2017 Apr 1;36(4):689–95.
- 79. Chérif MS, Koonrungsesomboon N, Kassé D, Cissé SD, Diallo SB, Chérif F, Camara F, Avenido EF, Diakité M, Diallo MP, Le Gall E. Ebola virus disease in children during the 2014–2015 epidemic in Guinea: a nationwide cohort study. European journal of pediatrics. 2017 Jun 1;176(6):791–6. pmid:28444452
- 80. Curran KG. Cluster of Ebola virus disease linked to a single funeral—Moyamba District, Sierra Leone, 2014. MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report. 2016;65.
- 81. Dallatomasina S, Crestani R, Sylvester Squire J, Declerk H, Caleo GM, Wolz A, Stinson K, Patten G, Brechard R, Gbabai OB, Spreicher A. Ebola outbreak in rural West Africa: epidemiology, clinical features and outcomes. Tropical Medicine & International Health. 2015 Apr 1;20(4):448–54.
- 82. Dietz PM, Jambai A, Paweska JT, Yoti Z, Ksaizek TG. Epidemiology and risk factors for Ebola virus disease in Sierra Leone—23 May 2014 to 31 January 2015. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2015 Jul 15;61(11):1648–54. pmid:26179011
- 83. Damkjær M, Rudolf F, Mishra S, Young A, Storgaard M. Clinical features and outcome of Ebola virus disease in pediatric patients: a retrospective case series. The Journal of pediatrics. 2017 Mar 1;182:378–81. pmid:27939106
- 84. Fang LQ, Yang Y, Jiang JF, Yao HW, Kargbo D, Li XL, Jiang BG, Kargbo B, Tong YG, Wang YW, Liu K. Transmission dynamics of Ebola virus disease and intervention effectiveness in Sierra Leone. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2016 Apr 19;113(16):4488–93.
- 85. Faye O, Boëlle PY, Heleze E, Faye O, Loucoubar C, Magassouba NF, Soropogui B, Keita S, Gakou T, Koivogui L, Cauchemez S. Chains of transmission and control of Ebola virus disease in Conakry, Guinea, in 2014: an observational study. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2015 Mar 1;15(3):320–6. pmid:25619149
- 86. Ji YJ, Duan XZ, Gao XD, Li L, Li C, Ji D, Li WG, Wang LF, Meng YH, Yang X, Ling BF. Clinical presentations and outcomes of patients with Ebola virus disease in Freetown, Sierra Leone. Infectious diseases of poverty. 2016 Dec;5(1):101. pmid:27806732
- 87. Kelly JD, Barrie MB, Mesman AW, Karku S, Quiwa K, Drasher M, Schlough GW, Dierberg K, Koedoyoma S, Lindan CP, Jones JH. Anatomy of a Hotspot: Chain and Seroepidemiology of Ebola Virus Transmission, Sukudu, Sierra Leone, 2015–16. The Journal of infectious diseases. 2018 Jan 9;217(8):1214–21. pmid:29325149
- 88. Lado M, Walker NF, Baker P, Haroon S, Brown CS, Youkee D, Studd N, Kessete Q, Maini R, Boyles T, Hanciles E. Clinical features of patients isolated for suspected Ebola virus disease at Connaught Hospital, Freetown, Sierra Leone: a retrospective cohort study. The Lancet infectious diseases. 2015 Sep 1;15(9):1024–33. pmid:26213248
- 89.
Mobula LM, MacDermott N, Hoggart C, Brantly K, Plyler L, Brown J, Kauffeldt B, Eisenhut D, Cooper LA, Fankhauser J. Clinical Manifestations and Modes of Death among Patients with Ebola Virus Disease, Monrovia, Liberia, 2014.
- 90. Nanclares C, Kapetshi J, Lionetto F, de la Rosa O, Tamfun JJ, Alia M, Kobinger G, Bernasconi A. Ebola virus disease, Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2014. Emerging infectious diseases. 2016 Sep;22(9):1579. pmid:27533284
- 91. Ohuabunwo C, Ameh C, Oduyebo O, Ahumibe A, Mutiu B, Olayinka A, Gbadamosi W, Garcia E, Nanclares C, Famiyesin W, Mohammed A. Clinical profile and containment of the Ebola virus disease outbreak in two large West African cities, Nigeria, July–September 2014. International Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2016 Dec 1;53:23–9. pmid:27575939
- 92. Pini A, Zomahoun D, Duraffour S, Derrough T, Charles M, Quick J, Loman N, Cowley L, Leno M, Ouedraogo N, Thiam O. Field investigation with real–time virus genetic characterisation support of a cluster of Ebola virus disease cases in Dubréka, Guinea, April to June 2015. Eurosurveillance. 2018 Mar 22;23(12):17–00140.
- 93. Qin E, Bi J, Zhao M, Wang Y, Guo T, Yan T, Li Z, Sun J, Zhang J, Chen S, Wu Y. Clinical features of patients with Ebola virus disease in Sierra Leone. Clinical infectious diseases. 2015 May 20;61(4):491–5. pmid:25995207
- 94. Williams GS, Naiene J, Gayflor J, Malibiche T, Zoogley B, Frank WG, Nayeri F. Twenty–one days of isolation: A prospective observational cohort study of an Ebola–exposed hot zone community in Liberia. Journal of Infection. 2015 Aug 1;71(2):150–7. pmid:25982026
- 95. Xu Z, Jin B, Teng G, Rong Y, Sun L, Zhang J, Du N, Liu L, Su H, Yuan Y, Chen H. Epidemiologic characteristics, clinical manifestations, and risk factors of 139 patients with Ebola virus disease in western Sierra Leone. American journal of infection control. 2016 Nov 1;44(11):1285–90. pmid:27317404
- 96. Yan T, Mu J, Qin E, Wang Y, Liu L, Wu D, Jia H, Li Z, Guo T, Wang X, Qin Y. Clinical characteristics of 154 patients suspected of having Ebola virus disease in the Ebola holding center of Jui Government Hospital in Sierra Leone during the 2014 Ebola outbreak. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases. 2015 Oct 1;34(10):2089–95.
- 97. Blackley DJ, Lindblade KA, Kateh F, Broyles LN, Westercamp M, Neatherlin JC, Pillai SK, Tucker A, Mott JA, Walke H, Nyenswah T. Rapid intervention to reduce Ebola transmission in a remote village—Gbarpolu County, Liberia, 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Feb 27;64(7):175–8. pmid:25719678
- 98. Incident Management System Ebola Epidemiology Team, CDC, Guinea Interministerial Committee for Response Against the Ebola Virus and the World Health Organization, CDC Guinea Response Team, Liberia Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, CDC Liberia Response Team, Sierra Leone Ministry of Health and Sanitation, CDC Sierra Leone Response Team, Viral Special Pathogens Branch, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC. Update: Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic—West Africa, November 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2014 Nov 21;63(46):1064–6. pmid:25412064
- 99. Incident Management System Ebola Epidemiology Team, CDC, Guinea Interministerial Committee for Response Against the Ebola Virus and the World Health Organization, CDC Guinea Response Team, Liberia Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, CDC Liberia Response Team, Sierra Leone Ministry of Health and Sanitation, CDC Sierra Leone Response Team, Viral Special Pathogens Branch, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, CDC. Update: Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic—West Africa, February 2015. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2015 Feb 27;64(07);186–187.
- 100. Bawo L, Fallah M, Kateh F, Nagbe T, Clement P, Gasasira A, Mahmoud N, Musa E, Lo T, Pillai S, Seeman S. Elimination of Ebola virus transmission in Liberia–September 3, 2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Sep 11;64(35):979–80. pmid:26355323
- 101. Fitzpatrick G, Vogt F, Moi Gbabai OB, Decroo T, Keane M, De Clerck H, Grolla A, Brechard R, Stinson K, Van Herp M. The contribution of Ebola viral load at admission and other patient characteristics to mortality in a Medecins Sans Frontieres Ebola case management centre, Kailahun, Sierra Leone, June–October 2014. The Journal of infectious diseases. 2015 May 22;212(11):1752–8. pmid:26002981
- 102. Nyenswah T, Blackley DJ, Freeman T, Lindblade KA, Arzoaquoi SK, Mott JA, Williams JN, Halldin CN, Kollie F, Laney AS; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Community quarantine to interrupt Ebola virus transmission—Mawah Village, Bong County, Liberia, August-October, 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Feb 27;64(7):179–82. pmid:25719679
- 103.
Publishing Research Consortium. Publishing research consortium peer review survey 2015. London, England: Mark Ware Consulting. Retrieved from http://publishingresearchconstorium.com.2016
- 104. Bland J, Altman D. Statistics notes: Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ. 1997;314:275. pmid:9055718
- 105.
Nunnally J, Bernstein L. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw–Hill Higher, INC; 1994
- 106. Streiner DL. Starting at the beginning: an introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. Journal of personality assessment. 2003 Feb 1;80(1):99–103. pmid:12584072
- 107. Mukaka MM. A guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research. Malawi Medical Journal. 2012;24(3):69–71. pmid:23638278
- 108. Taylor R. Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: a basic review. Journal of diagnostic medical sonography. 1990 Jan;6(1):35–9.
- 109. Anderson D.R., Burnham K.P. & Thompson W.L. (2000) Null hypothesis testing:problems, prevalence, and an alternative. Journal of Wildlife Management, 64, 912–923.
- 110.
Burnham K.P. & Anderson D.R. (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practice information–theoretic approach. Springer Verlag, New York.
- 111. Whittingham MJ, Stephens PA, Bradbury RB, Freckleton RP. Why do we still use stepwise modelling in ecology and behaviour?. Journal of animal ecology. 2006 Sep 1;75(5):1182–9. pmid:16922854
- 112. Marriott S, Palmer C, Lelliott P. Disseminating healthcare information: getting the message across. BMJ Quality & Safety. 2000 Mar 1;9(1):58–62.
- 113. Aronson B, Long M. HINARI: Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative. Serials. 2003;16(1):7–12.
- 114. Matheka DM, Nderitu J, Mutonga D, Otiti MI, Siegel K, Demaio AR. Open access: academic publishing and its implications on knowledge equity in Kenya. Global Health. 2014; 10:26. pmid:24716579
- 115.
Global Health Protection and Security [Internet]. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2018 [cited 2019Apr1]. https://www.cdc.gov/globalhealth/healthprotection/resources/fact-sheets/fetp-factsheet.html
- 116. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L, Consort Group. Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. Jama. 2001 Apr 18;285(15):1992–5. pmid:11308436
- 117. Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A, Schulz K, Altman DG, Hill C, Gaboury I. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Medical journal of Australia. 2006 Sep;185(5):263–7. pmid:16948622
- 118. Smidt N, Rutjes AW, Van der Windt DA, Ostelo RW, Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bouter LM, De Vet HC. The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies since the STARD statement: has it improved?. Neurology. 2006 Sep 12;67(5):792–7. pmid:16966539
- 119. Prady SL, Richmond SJ, Morton VM, MacPherson H. A systematic evaluation of the impact of STRICTA and CONSORT recommendations on quality of reporting for acupuncture trials. PloS one. 2008 Feb 13;3(2):e1577. pmid:18270568
- 120.
Moher D, OcampoM AD, Kenneth F, Moher S. Citing the CONSORT statement and explanation and elaboration paper: What’s it all about? 2009. InVancouver, Canada: 6th International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication.