↓ Skip to main content

How severe and prevalent are Ebola and Marburg viruses? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the case fatality rates and seroprevalence

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
13 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
134 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
How severe and prevalent are Ebola and Marburg viruses? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the case fatality rates and seroprevalence
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-2045-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luke Nyakarahuka, Clovice Kankya, Randi Krontveit, Benjamin Mayer, Frank N. Mwiine, Julius Lutwama, Eystein Skjerve

Abstract

Ebola and Marburg virus diseases are said to occur at a low prevalence, but are very severe diseases with high lethalities. The fatality rates reported in different outbreaks ranged from 24-100%. In addition, sero-surveys conducted have shown different seropositivity for both Ebola and Marburg viruses. We aimed to use a meta-analysis approach to estimate the case fatality and seroprevalence rates of these filoviruses, providing vital information for epidemic response and preparedness in countries affected by these diseases. Published literature was retrieved through a search of databases. Articles were included if they reported number of deaths, cases, and seropositivity. We further cross-referenced with ministries of health, WHO and CDC databases. The effect size was proportion represented by case fatality rate (CFR) and seroprevalence. Analysis was done using the metaprop command in STATA. The weighted average CFR of Ebola virus disease was estimated to be 65.0% [95% CI (54.0-76.0%), I(2) = 97.98%] whereas that of Marburg virus disease was 53.8% (26.5-80.0%, I(2) = 88.6%). The overall seroprevalence of Ebola virus was 8.0% (5.0%-11.0%, I(2) = 98.7%), whereas that for Marburg virus was 1.2% (0.5-2.0%, I(2) = 94.8%). The most severe species of ebolavirus was Zaire ebolavirus while Bundibugyo Ebolavirus was the least severe. The pooled CFR and seroprevalence for Ebola and Marburg viruses were found to be lower than usually reported, with species differences despite high heterogeneity between studies. Countries with an improved health surveillance and epidemic response have lower CFR, thereby indicating need for improving early detection and epidemic response in filovirus outbreaks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Cameroon 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 132 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 16%
Student > Master 20 15%
Researcher 19 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 4%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 41 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 5%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 51 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 09 July 2022.
All research outputs
#1,893,498
of 24,878,531 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#494
of 8,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,531
of 426,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#18
of 213 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,878,531 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,364 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 426,956 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 213 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 92% of its contemporaries.