Dataset Information

Evaluation of reporting timeliness of public health surveillance systems for infectious diseases.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Timeliness is a key performance measure of public health surveillance systems. Timeliness can vary by disease, intended use of the data, and public health system level. Studies were reviewed to describe methods used to evaluate timeliness and the reporting timeliness of National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) data was evaluated to determine if this system could support timely notification and state response to multistate outbreaks.

Methods

Published papers that quantitatively measured timeliness of infectious disease surveillance systems operating in the U.S. were reviewed. Median reporting timeliness lags were computed for selected nationally notifiable infectious diseases based on a state-assigned week number and various date types. The percentage of cases reported within the estimated incubation periods for each disease was also computed.

Results

Few studies have published quantitative measures of reporting timeliness; these studies do not evaluate timeliness in a standard manner. When timeliness of NNDSS data was evaluated, the median national reporting delay, based on date of disease onset, ranged from 12 days for meningococcal disease to 40 days for pertussis. Diseases with the longer incubation periods tended to have a higher percentage of cases reported within its incubation period. For acute hepatitis A virus infection, which had the longest incubation period of the diseases studied, more than 60% of cases were reported within one incubation period for each date type reported. For cryptosporidiosis, Escherichia coli O157:H7 infection, meningococcal disease, salmonellosis, and shigellosis, less than 40% of cases were reported within one incubation period for each reported date type.

Conclusion

Published evaluations of infectious disease surveillance reporting timeliness are few in number and are not comparable. A more standardized approach for evaluating and describing surveillance system timeliness should be considered; a recommended methodology is presented. Our analysis of NNDSS reporting timeliness indicated that among the conditions evaluated (except for acute hepatitis A infection), the long reporting lag and the variability across states limits the usefulness of NNDSS data and aberration detection analysis of those data for identification of and timely response to multistate outbreaks. Further evaluation of the factors that contribute to NNDSS reporting timeliness is warranted.

SUBMITTER: Jajosky RA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC509250 | biostudies-literature | 2004 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of reporting timeliness of public health surveillance systems for infectious diseases.

Jajosky Ruth Ann RA Groseclose Samuel L SL

BMC public health 20040726

<h4>Background</h4>Timeliness is a key performance measure of public health surveillance systems. Timeliness can vary by disease, intended use of the data, and public health system level. Studies were reviewed to describe methods used to evaluate timeliness and the reporting timeliness of National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) data was evaluated to determine if this system could support timely notification and state response to multistate outbreaks.<h4>Methods</h4>Published pap ...[more]

PMID: 15274746

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine which aspects of notification systems are associated with timely notification. METHODOLOGY:Articles reviewing timeliness of notifications published between 2000 and 2017 were searched in Pubmed and Scopus. Using a standardized notification chain, timeliness of reporting system for each article was defined as either sufficient (? 80% notifications in time), partly sufficient (? 50-80%), or insufficient (< 50%) according to the article's predefined timeframe, a standardized timeframe for all articles, and a disease specific timeframe. Electronic notification systems were compared with conventional methods (postal mail, fax, telephone, email) and mobile phone reporting. RESULTS:48 articles were identified. In almost one third of the studies with a predefined timeframe (39), timeliness of notification systems was either sufficient or insufficient (11/39, 28% and 12/39, 31% resp.). Applying the standardized timeframe (45 studies) revealed similar outcomes (13/45, 29%, sufficient notification timeframe, vs 15/45, 33%, insufficient). The disease specific timeframe was not met by any study. Systems involving reporting by laboratories most often complied sufficiently with predefined or standardized timeframes. Outcomes were not related to electronic, conventional notification systems or mobile phone reporting. Electronic systems were faster in comparative studies (10/13); this hardly resulted in sufficient timeliness, neither according to predefined nor to standardized timeframes. CONCLUSION:A minority of notification systems meets either predefined, standardized or disease specific timeframes. Systems including laboratory reporting are associated with timely notification. Electronic systems reduce reporting delay, but implementation needs considerable effort to comply with notification timeframes. During outbreak threats, patient, doctors and laboratory testing delays need to be reduced to achieve timely detection and notification. Public health authorities should incorporate procedures for this in their preparedness plans.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has increased the importance of the deployment of digital detection surveillance systems to support early warning and monitoring of infectious diseases. These opportunities create a "double-edge sword," as the ethical governance of such approaches often lags behind technological achievements.ObjectiveThe aim was to investigate ethical issues identified from utilizing artificial intelligence-augmented surveillance or early warning systems to monitor and detect common or novel infectious disease outbreaks.MethodsIn a number of databases, we searched relevant articles that addressed ethical issues of using artificial intelligence, digital surveillance systems, early warning systems, and/or big data analytics technology for detecting, monitoring, or tracing infectious diseases according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, and further identified and analyzed them with a theoretical framework.ResultsThis systematic review identified 29 articles presented in 6 major themes clustered under individual, organizational, and societal levels, including awareness of implementing digital surveillance, digital integrity, trust, privacy and confidentiality, civil rights, and governance. While these measures were understandable during a pandemic, the public had concerns about receiving inadequate information; unclear governance frameworks; and lack of privacy protection, data integrity, and autonomy when utilizing infectious disease digital surveillance. The barriers to engagement could widen existing health care disparities or digital divides by underrepresenting vulnerable and at-risk populations, and patients' highly sensitive data, such as their movements and contacts, could be exposed to outside sources, impinging significantly upon basic human and civil rights.ConclusionsOur findings inform ethical considerations for service delivery models for medical practitioners and policymakers involved in the use of digital surveillance for infectious disease spread, and provide a basis for a global governance structure.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42021259180; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=259180.

Project description:CONTEXT:In the United States, state laws require health care providers to report specific diseases and events to public health authorities, a fundamental facet of disease surveillance. However, reporting by providers is often inconsistent, infrequent, and delayed. OBJECTIVE:To examine knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding provider disease reporting and to understand current barriers to provider disease reporting. DESIGN:A cross-sectional study was conducted via an anonymous, standardized electronic survey. SETTING:The survey was conducted at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, a large, tertiary academic medical center in Nashville, Tennessee. PARTICIPANTS:Health care providers in 4 specialties (internal medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics-gynecology, and emergency medicine). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S):Knowledge of and attitudes regarding provider reporting of diseases to public health authorities in Tennessee. RESULTS:The majority of providers acknowledged they cared for patients with reportable diseases (362/435, 83.2%) and believed that it was their responsibility to report to public health authorities (429/436, 98.4%); however, less than half had ever reported a case (206/436, 47.2%). The median percent correct on the knowledge assessment of Tennessee reportable diseases and conditions was 81.3% (interquartile range = 68.8-87.5). Providers cited a lack of knowledge of which diseases are reportable (186/429, 43.3%) and the logistics of reporting (153/429, 35.7%) as the primary barriers for compliance. CONCLUSION:Most providers acknowledged they cared for patients with reportable diseases and believed they had an obligation to report to public health authorities. However, a lack of knowledge about reporting was frequently described as a limitation to report effectively. Many knowledge deficits were significantly greater among residents than other providers.The policy and practice implications of these findings include a demonstrated need for education of providers about disease reporting as well as development of more convenient reporting mechanisms. Fundamental knowledge of reportable disease requirements and procedures is critical for participation in the broader public health system.

Project description:BackgroundThe Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) hosts some of the world's worst humanitarian and health crises. The implementation of health surveillance in this region has faced multiple constraints. New and novel approaches in surveillance are in a constant state of high and immediate demand. Identifying the existing literature on surveillance helps foster an understanding of scientific development and thus potentially supports future development directions.ObjectiveThis study aims to illustrate the scientific production, quantify the scholarly impact, and highlight the characteristics of publications on public health surveillance in the EMR over the past decade.MethodsWe performed a Scopus search using keywords related to public health surveillance or its disciplines, cross-referenced with EMR countries, from 2011 to July 2021. Data were exported and analyzed using Microsoft Excel and Visualization of Similarities Viewer. Quality of journals was determined using SCImago Journal Rank and CiteScore.ResultsWe retrieved 1987 documents, of which 1927 (96.98%) were articles or reviews. There has been an incremental increase in the number of publications (exponential growth, R2=0.80) over the past decade. Publications were mostly affiliated with Iran (501/1987, 25.21%), the United States (468/1987, 23.55%), Pakistan (243/1987, 12.23%), Egypt (224/1987, 11.27%), and Saudi Arabia (209/1987, 10.52%). However, Iran only had links with 40 other countries (total link strength 164), and the biggest collaborator from the EMR was Egypt, with 67 links (total link strength 402). Within the other EMR countries, only Morocco, Lebanon, and Jordan produced ≥79 publications in the 10-year period. Most publications (1551/1987, 78.06%) were affiliated with EMR universities. Most journals were categorized as medical journals, and the highest number of articles were published in the Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal (SCImago Journal Rank 0.442; CiteScore 1.5). Retrieved documents had an average of 18.4 (SD 125.5) citations per document and an h-index of 66. The top-3 most cited documents were from the Global Burden of Diseases study. We found 70 high-frequency terms, occurring ≥10 times in author keywords, connected in 3 clusters. COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, and pandemic represented the most recent 2020 cluster.ConclusionsThis is the first research study to quantify the published literature on public health surveillance and its disciplines in the EMR. Research productivity has steadily increased over the past decade, and Iran has been the leading country publishing relevant research. Recurrent recent surveillance themes included COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2. This study also sheds light on the gaps in surveillance research in the EMR, including inadequate publications on noncommunicable diseases and injury-related surveillance.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of reporting timeliness of public health surveillance systems for infectious diseases.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Evaluation of reporting timeliness of public health surveillance systems for infectious diseases.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure