Background:In the three decades since the first reported case of Ebola virus,most known index cases have been consistently traced to the hunting of“bush meat”,and women have consistently recorded relatively high fat...Background:In the three decades since the first reported case of Ebola virus,most known index cases have been consistently traced to the hunting of“bush meat”,and women have consistently recorded relatively high fatality rates in most catastrophic outbreaks.This paper discusses Ebola-related risk factors,which constantly interact with cultural values,and provides an insight into the link between gender and the risk of contracting infectious diseases,using Ebola virus as an example within Africa.Method:A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted using the PubMed,Ovid Medline and Global Health CABI databases as well as CAB Abstracts,including gray literature.We used a descriptive and sex-and gender-based analysis to revisit previous studies on Ebola outbreaks since 1976 to 2014,and disaggregated the cases and fatality rates according to gender and the sources of known index cases based on available data.Results:In total,approximately 1530 people died in all previous Ebola outbreaks from 1976 to 2012 compared with over 11,310 deaths from the 2014 outbreak.Women’s increased exposure can be attributed to time spent at home and their responsibility for caring for the sick,while men’s increased vulnerability to the virus can be attributed to their responsibility for caring for livestock and to time spent away from home,as most known sources of the index cases have been infected in the process of hunting.We present a conceptual model of a circle of interacting risk factors for Ebola in the African context.Conclusion:There is currently no evidence related to biological differences in female or male sex that increases Ebola virus transmission and vulnerability;rather,there are differences in the level of exposure between men and women.Gender is therefore an important risk factor to consider in the design of health programs.Building the capacity for effective risk communication is a worthwhile investment in public and global health for future emergency responses.展开更多
文摘Background:In the three decades since the first reported case of Ebola virus,most known index cases have been consistently traced to the hunting of“bush meat”,and women have consistently recorded relatively high fatality rates in most catastrophic outbreaks.This paper discusses Ebola-related risk factors,which constantly interact with cultural values,and provides an insight into the link between gender and the risk of contracting infectious diseases,using Ebola virus as an example within Africa.Method:A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted using the PubMed,Ovid Medline and Global Health CABI databases as well as CAB Abstracts,including gray literature.We used a descriptive and sex-and gender-based analysis to revisit previous studies on Ebola outbreaks since 1976 to 2014,and disaggregated the cases and fatality rates according to gender and the sources of known index cases based on available data.Results:In total,approximately 1530 people died in all previous Ebola outbreaks from 1976 to 2012 compared with over 11,310 deaths from the 2014 outbreak.Women’s increased exposure can be attributed to time spent at home and their responsibility for caring for the sick,while men’s increased vulnerability to the virus can be attributed to their responsibility for caring for livestock and to time spent away from home,as most known sources of the index cases have been infected in the process of hunting.We present a conceptual model of a circle of interacting risk factors for Ebola in the African context.Conclusion:There is currently no evidence related to biological differences in female or male sex that increases Ebola virus transmission and vulnerability;rather,there are differences in the level of exposure between men and women.Gender is therefore an important risk factor to consider in the design of health programs.Building the capacity for effective risk communication is a worthwhile investment in public and global health for future emergency responses.
