MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210263442 · doi:10.2196/36485

Role of Rapid Response Teams in Response to Outbreaks in Yemen, 2020: Descriptive Study

2022· article· en· W4210263442 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdulqawi Mohammed Qaserah, Labiba Anam, Reema Alyosfi

Bibliographic record

VenueIproceedings · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePublic healthMeaslesOutbreakPublic health surveillanceEnvironmental healthDiphtheriaPopulationRapid response teamChristian ministryFamily medicineMedical emergencyVaccinationNursingVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Yemen has been increasingly reporting public health emergencies (eg, cholera). The Ministry of Public Health and Population (MoPH&P) has put in place the Rapid Response Teams (RRTs) mechanism from the national to district level to investigate and initiate the response to public health emergencies. An RRT is a technical, multidisciplinary team that is readily available for quick mobilization and deployment in case of emergencies. Objective The aim of this analysis was to summarize the role of RRTs in response to outbreaks in Yemen during 2020. Methods Data were obtained from the electronic Diseases Early Warning System (eDEWS) in Excel format covering the period from January to December 2020, including governorates, diseases, and other variables. Data were cleaned and analyzed using Excel 2013. Qualitative data are summarized as percentages. Data are presented using tables, graphs, and maps. Results A total of 39,451 field descents were performed. Nearly half of the activities (n=18,565, 47.06%) were for outbreak investigation of various infectious diseases, including cholera (n=9030), severe acute respiratory infection (n=1949), diphtheria (n=1532), measles (n=1328), malaria (n=1012), dengue fever (n=1008), pertussis (n=803), mumps (n=676), chickenpox (n=583), acute flaccid paralysis (n=482), and meningitis (n=162). Approximately 1747 (4.43%) supervision visits were implemented. Regarding health education, 19,139 (48.51%) health education sessions were executed, with 3419 (17.86%) performed at health facilities and 15,720 (82.14%) performed outside health facilities (eg, schools and outdoors). A total of 559,805 people attended the health education sessions. Conclusions RRTs support the MoPH&P in reducing or “slowing down” disease transmission as quickly as possible through various activities such as outbreak investigations and health education. Therefore, there is a strong need to continue supporting the RRTs financially and logistically by donors. In addition, governmental financial support to the RRTs is highly recommended to ensure the sustainability of the program.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIproceedingsSame topicViral Infections and Outbreaks ResearchFrench-language works237,207