The authors developed an integrated spatial modelling framework to estimate the risk of cross-border importation from the 2026 Bundibugyo Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda. The framework combines high-resolution epidemic and population data with complementary mobility layers (both air and land mobility), measures of geographical accessibility, and conflict-adjusted travel times to capture realistic pathways for regional dissemination.
Using these inputs the study quantified three complementary importation risk metrics: overall importation risk, air-mediated importation risk, and land-mediated importation risk. The analyses were performed for the current epidemic situation and under counterfactual outbreak amplification scenarios focused on major regional hubs to assess how changes in epidemic size and location might alter continental risk patterns.
Importation risk across Africa was found to be spatially concentrated. The analysis estimated that neighbouring countries accounted for 85% of the continental importation risk under the epidemic configuration evaluated. Despite this concentration, the study highlighted that significant risk can extend beyond immediate neighbours, while some adjacent countries remain at relatively low risk. This pattern reflects the complementary roles of land and air mobility in shaping how infections may be transported across borders.
A set of countries emerged as high importation-risk destinations: South Sudan, Rwanda, Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia, Ethiopia, Burundi, Angola, South Africa, the Central African Republic, and Nigeria. The authors emphasize that these destinations differ markedly in their health system capacity and emergency preparedness, which affects their ability to detect and contain imported cases.
To contextualize importation risk, the study compared estimated importation pressure with national readiness indicators. This comparison revealed substantial heterogeneity in preparedness across the continent. The largest readiness gaps—where high importation risk coincided with low preparedness—were identified in South Sudan, Burundi, and the Central African Republic. These countries were highlighted as top priorities for preparedness investments and support given their combination of elevated importation risk and limited readiness.
Beyond the highest-priority countries, the authors identified a second tier of preparedness priorities. Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, and Ghana were noted as combining intermediate-to-high importation risk with comparatively low readiness indicators. The study suggests these countries should be considered for strengthened surveillance and targeted preparedness measures to reduce the risk of undetected importation and onward transmission.
When the authors modelled outbreak amplification in major regional hubs, the countries ranked as highest-risk remained largely stable, but additional nations entered the high-risk group and continental importation pressure increased substantially. These scenario results underline that risk maps are dynamic: changes in epidemic size or geographic focus can materially shift where importation pressure concentrates, reinforcing the need for flexible and adaptive preparedness planning.
By integrating epidemiological data with both land and air mobility and contextual readiness metrics, the study provides a refined geography of regional importation risk for the 2026 Bundibugyo Ebola outbreak. The authors propose that this refined map can support:
The contrasting roles of air and land mobility in shaping risk emphasize that preparedness planning must account for both long-distance and overland transmission routes, particularly for countries that are not immediate neighbours of the outbreak but are well connected by air travel.
The authors state that importation risk values and the country-level readiness score values are available on GitHub at the project repository. Proprietary air travel data used in the analysis are commercially available on request from the International Air Transport Association (IATA). Other datasets cited in the study are publicly available according to the paper's data availability statement.
The article is posted as a medRxiv preprint and has not been peer-reviewed; the authors note this caveat explicitly. The study used only data that were openly and publicly available prior to the analysis. No ethics committee approval was required for the work as described. Specific methodological details, numerical results beyond those summarized here, and full model code and outputs are reported in the authors' repository and the preprint itself; readers should consult those sources for granular results and to reproduce analyses.
Overall, the study offers a data-driven, spatially explicit assessment of where imported Bundibugyo Ebola infections are most likely to arrive in Africa and highlights countries and regions where preparedness strengthening should be prioritized. The framework is intended to be updated as outbreak data change, enabling dynamic adjustments to surveillance and support strategies.