Hide metadata

dc.contributor.authorIpekci, Aziz M.
dc.contributor.authorBuitrago-Garcia, Diana
dc.contributor.authorMeili, Kaspar W.
dc.contributor.authorKrauer, Fabienne
dc.contributor.authorPrajapati, Nirmala
dc.contributor.authorThapa, Shabnam
dc.contributor.authorWildisen, Lea
dc.contributor.authorAraujo-Chaveron, Lucia
dc.contributor.authorBaumann, Lukas
dc.contributor.authorShah, Sanam
dc.contributor.authorWhiteley, Tessa
dc.contributor.authorSolís-García, Gonzalo
dc.contributor.authorTsotra, Foteini
dc.contributor.authorZhelyazkov, Ivan
dc.contributor.authorImeri, Hira
dc.contributor.authorLow, Nicola
dc.contributor.authorCounotte, Michel J.
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-16T06:02:10Z
dc.date.available2021-03-16T06:02:10Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationBMC Medical Research Methodology. 2021 Mar 11;21(1):50
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/84119
dc.description.abstractBackground Outbreaks of infectious diseases generate outbreaks of scientific evidence. In 2016 epidemics of Zika virus emerged, and in 2020, a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused a pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We compared patterns of scientific publications for the two infections to analyse the evolution of the evidence. Methods We annotated publications on Zika virus and SARS-CoV-2 that we collected using living evidence databases according to study design. We used descriptive statistics to categorise and compare study designs over time. Results We found 2286 publications about Zika virus in 2016 and 21,990 about SARS-CoV-2 up to 24 May 2020, of which we analysed a random sample of 5294 (24%). For both infections, there were more epidemiological than laboratory science studies. Amongst epidemiological studies for both infections, case reports, case series and cross-sectional studies emerged first, cohort and case-control studies were published later. Trials were the last to emerge. The number of preprints was much higher for SARS-CoV-2 than for Zika virus. Conclusions Similarities in the overall pattern of publications might be generalizable, whereas differences are compatible with differences in the characteristics of a disease. Understanding how evidence accumulates during disease outbreaks helps us understand which types of public health questions we can answer and when.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsThe Author(s)
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.titleOutbreaks of publications about emerging infectious diseases: the case of SARS-CoV-2 and Zika virus
dc.typeJournal article
dc.date.updated2021-03-16T06:02:15Z
dc.creator.authorIpekci, Aziz M.
dc.creator.authorBuitrago-Garcia, Diana
dc.creator.authorMeili, Kaspar W.
dc.creator.authorKrauer, Fabienne
dc.creator.authorPrajapati, Nirmala
dc.creator.authorThapa, Shabnam
dc.creator.authorWildisen, Lea
dc.creator.authorAraujo-Chaveron, Lucia
dc.creator.authorBaumann, Lukas
dc.creator.authorShah, Sanam
dc.creator.authorWhiteley, Tessa
dc.creator.authorSolís-García, Gonzalo
dc.creator.authorTsotra, Foteini
dc.creator.authorZhelyazkov, Ivan
dc.creator.authorImeri, Hira
dc.creator.authorLow, Nicola
dc.creator.authorCounotte, Michel J.
dc.identifier.cristin1927314
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01244-7
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:no-86852
dc.type.documentTidsskriftartikkel
dc.type.peerreviewedPeer reviewed
dc.identifier.fulltextFulltext https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/84119/1/12874_2021_Article_1244.pdf
dc.type.versionPublishedVersion
cristin.articleid50


Files in this item

Appears in the following Collection

Hide metadata

Attribution 4.0 International
This item's license is: Attribution 4.0 International