↓ Skip to main content

The link between the West African Ebola outbreak and health systems in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#34 of 1,220)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
29 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
504 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The link between the West African Ebola outbreak and health systems in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone: a systematic review
Published in
Globalization and Health, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12992-016-0224-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Haitham Shoman, Emilie Karafillakis, Salman Rawaf

Abstract

An Ebola outbreak started in December 2013 in Guinea and spread to Liberia and Sierra Leone in 2014. The health systems in place in the three countries lacked the infrastructure and the preparation to respond to the outbreak quickly and the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared a public health emergency of international concern on August 8 2014. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of health systems' organisation and performance on the West African Ebola outbreak in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone and lessons learned. The WHO health system building blocks were used to evaluate the performance of the health systems in these countries. A systematic review of articles published from inception until July 2015 was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. Electronic databases including Medline, Embase, Global Health, and the Cochrane library were searched for relevant literature. Grey literature was also searched through Google Scholar and Scopus. Articles were exported and selected based on a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data was then extracted into a spreadsheet and a descriptive analysis was performed. Each study was critically appraised using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool. The review was supplemented with expert interviews where participants were identified from reference lists and using the snowball method. Thirteen articles were included in the study and six experts from different organisations were interviewed. Findings were analysed based on the WHO health system building blocks. Shortage of health workforce had an important effect on the control of Ebola but also suffered the most from the outbreak. This was followed by information and research, medical products and technologies, health financing and leadership and governance. Poor surveillance and lack of proper communication also contributed to the outbreak. Lack of available funds jeopardised payments and purchase of essential resources and medicines. Leadership and governance had least findings but an overarching consensus that they would have helped prompt response, adequate coordination and management of resources. Ensuring an adequate and efficient health workforce is of the utmost importance to ensure a strong health system and a quick response to new outbreaks. Adequate service delivery results from a collective success of the other blocks. Health financing and its management is crucial to ensure availability of medical products, fund payments to staff and purchase necessary equipment. However, leadership and governance needs to be rigorously explored on their main defects to control the outbreak.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 504 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 504 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 127 25%
Researcher 53 11%
Student > Bachelor 53 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 7%
Other 30 6%
Other 70 14%
Unknown 138 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 97 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 64 13%
Social Sciences 62 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 3%
Other 91 18%
Unknown 154 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 123. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 April 2021.
All research outputs
#335,728
of 25,295,968 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#34
of 1,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,218
of 433,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#2
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,295,968 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,220 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 433,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.