Author: Cori, Anne; Donnelly, Christl A.; Dorigatti, Ilaria; Ferguson, Neil M.; Fraser, Christophe; Garske, Tini; Jombart, Thibaut; Nedjati-Gilani, Gemma; Nouvellet, Pierre; Riley, Steven; Van Kerkhove, Maria D.; Mills, Harriet L.; Blake, Isobel M.
Title: Key data for outbreak evaluation: building on the Ebola experience Document date: 2017_5_26
ID: 12t247bn_61
Snippet: During the West African Ebola epidemic, many data on interventions were recorded at a local level by some of the numerous partners (e.g. non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other organizations) involved in the response. For example, some data were collected on the number and capacity of hospitals over time [115] and these were used in a study modelling community transmission to assess the impact of increasing hospital bed capacity [116] . H.....
Document: During the West African Ebola epidemic, many data on interventions were recorded at a local level by some of the numerous partners (e.g. non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other organizations) involved in the response. For example, some data were collected on the number and capacity of hospitals over time [115] and these were used in a study modelling community transmission to assess the impact of increasing hospital bed capacity [116] . However, the decentralization of the response meant that intervention data were not systematically reported or collated and these data were not shared widely with the research community. A failure to report interventions centrally and systematically can make it difficult to disentangle a lack of intervention effect from a lack of intervention implementation. This can particularly be a problem when numerous groups coordinate their own efforts, making it impossible to draw firm conclusions about interventions. In the absence of detailed data on intervention efforts in West Africa, multiple studies have assessed the combined impact of all interventions in place, by comparing transmissibility in the early phase (with no intervention) to that in the later phases [87, 117] . However, this approach provides less compelling evidence of a causal effect and does not disentangle the impact of different interventions performed at the same time, and hence is less informative for future response planning.
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- capacity number and different intervention: 1
- capacity number and early phase: 1
- capacity number and hospital bed: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
- capacity number and hospital bed capacity: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
- causal effect and different intervention: 1
- causal effect and early phase: 1
- combined impact and community transmission: 1
- community transmission and different intervention: 1, 2
- community transmission and early phase: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- community transmission and Ebola epidemic: 1
- community transmission and hospital bed: 1, 2, 3, 4
- community transmission and hospital bed capacity: 1, 2, 3
- different intervention and early phase: 1
- different intervention and Ebola epidemic: 1
- different intervention and hospital bed: 1, 2
- different intervention and hospital bed capacity: 1
- early phase and Ebola epidemic: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
- early phase and hospital bed: 1, 2, 3
- early phase and hospital bed capacity: 1
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date