TY - JOUR
T1 - Outbreaks of publications about emerging infectious diseases
T2 - the case of SARS-CoV-2 and Zika virus
AU - Ipekci, Aziz Mert
AU - Buitrago-Garcia, Diana
AU - Meili, Kaspar Walter
AU - Krauer, Fabienne
AU - Prajapati, Nirmala
AU - Thapa, Shabnam
AU - Wildisen, Lea
AU - Araujo-Chaveron, Lucia
AU - Baumann, Lukas
AU - Shah, Sanam
AU - Whiteley, Tessa
AU - Solís-García, Gonzalo
AU - Tsotra, Foteini
AU - Zhelyazkov, Ivan
AU - Imeri, Hira
AU - Low, Nicola
AU - Counotte, Michel Jacques
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s).
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - Background: 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.
AB - Background: 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85102468585&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s12874-021-01244-7
DO - 10.1186/s12874-021-01244-7
M3 - Artículo
C2 - 33706715
AN - SCOPUS:85102468585
SN - 1471-2288
VL - 21
JO - BMC Medical Research Methodology
JF - BMC Medical Research Methodology
IS - 1
M1 - 50
ER -
