↓ Skip to main content

Incident Management Systems Are Essential for Effective Coordination of Large Disease Outbreaks: Perspectives from the Coordination of the Ebola Outbreak Response in Sierra Leone

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Incident Management Systems Are Essential for Effective Coordination of Large Disease Outbreaks: Perspectives from the Coordination of the Ebola Outbreak Response in Sierra Leone
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00254
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olushayo Oluseun Olu, Margaret Lamunu, Alexander Chimbaru, Ayotunde Adegboyega, Ishata Conteh, Ngoy Nsenga, Noah Sempiira, Kande-Bure Kamara, Foday Mohamed Dafae

Abstract

Response to the 2014-2015 Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in Sierra Leone overwhelmed the national capacity to contain it and necessitated a massive international response and strong coordination platform. Consequently, the Sierra Leone Government, with support of the international humanitarian community, established and implemented various models for national coordination of the outbreak. In this article, we review the strengths and limitations of the EVD outbreak response coordination systems in Sierra Leone and propose recommendations for improving coordination of similar outbreaks in the future. There were two main frameworks used for the coordination of the outbreak; the Emergency Operation Center (EOC) and the National Ebola Response Center (NERC). We observed an improvement in outbreak coordination as the management mechanism evolved from the EOC to the NERC. Both coordination systems had their advantages and disadvantages; however, the NERC coordination mechanism appeared to be more robust. We identified challenges, such as competition and duplication of efforts between the numerous coordination groups, slow resource mobilization, inadequate capacity of NERC/EOC staff for health coordination, and an overtly centralized coordination and decision-making system as the main coordination challenges during the outbreak. We recommend the establishment of EOCs with simple incident management system-based coordination prior to outbreaks, strong government leadership, decentralization of coordination systems, and functions to the epicenter of outbreaks, with clear demarcation of roles and responsibilities between different levels, regular training of key coordination leaders, and better community participation as methods to improve coordination of future disease outbreaks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 21%
Researcher 17 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Other 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 16 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 30%
Social Sciences 9 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 16 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 31 March 2017.
All research outputs
#6,985,392
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,281
of 10,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,781
of 414,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#26
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,055 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 414,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.