ArticleCanada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada2025
Is there sufficient evidence to inform personal protective equipment choices for healthcare workers caring for patients with viral hemorrhagic fevers?
Article in Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ugandan health authorities declared an outbreak of Ebola disease (EBOD), caused by the Sudan virus, in September 2022. A rapid review was conducted to update the Public Health Agency of Canada's guidelines for infection prevention and control measures for EBOD in healthcare settings to prepare for potential introduction of cases. Objective: Summarize the available evidence on personal protective equipment (PPE) use by healthcare workers (HCWs) to prevent exposure to and transmission of viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs), including Ebola virus. Methods: Electronic databases were searched to identify peer-reviewed evidence published from July 2014-October 2022. Peer-reviewed primary studies and literature reviews, in English or French, reporting on PPE for VHFs and filoviruses in the healthcare context were eligible for inclusion. Literature review processes were conducted by two reviewers using DistillerSR® systematic review software and the Public Health Agency of Canada's Infection Prevention and Control Critical Appraisal Toolkit. An environmental scan of grey literature was also conducted to inform the rapid review. Results: The database search yielded 417 citations and 29 studies were considered eligible for critical appraisal. In total, 20 studies were included in the narrative synthesis of evidence. The evidence base was limited regarding comparative effectiveness of types of PPE for preventing exposure to and transmission of VHFs to HCWs. Four studies reported on exposure to and transmission of a VHF. Sixteen studies provided data on other relevant topics, such as simulated contamination and lab-based tests of PPE integrity. Conclusion: There is limited evidence with which to draw conclusions on the comparative effectiveness of PPE to prevent exposure to and transmission of VHFs to HCWs. Additional research is required to determine the optimal PPE to protect HCWs from exposure to and transmission of VHFs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.