Dataset Information

Identifying scenarios and risk factors for Q fever outbreaks using qualitative analysis of expert opinion.

ABSTRACT: Q fever is an important zoonotic disease perceived to be an occupational hazard for those working with livestock. Outbreaks involving large numbers of people are uncommon, but the increasing case incidence coupled with changing environmental and industry conditions that promote transmission of Q fever has raised concerns that large and serious outbreaks could become more frequent. The aim of this study was to use expert opinion to better understand how large Q fever outbreaks might occur in an Australian context and to document factors believed to be drivers of disease transmission. Focus groups were conducted with human and animal health professionals across several Australian states. All discussions were recorded, transcribed verbatim and imported into NVIVO for thematic analysis. Four anthropogenic risk factors (disease awareness, industry practices, land use, human behaviour) and three ecological risk factors (physical environment, agent dissemination, animal hosts) emerged from the data. Analysis of expert opinions pointed to the existence of numerous scenarios in which Q fever outbreaks could occur, many of which depict acquisition in the wider community outside of traditional at-risk occupations. This perception of the expansion of Q fever from occupational-acquisition to community-acquisition is driven by greater overarching economic, political and socio-cultural influences that govern the way in which people live and work. Findings from this study highlight that outbreaks are complex phenomena that involve the convergence of diverse elements, not just that of the pathogen and host, but also the physical, political and socioeconomic environments in which they interact. A review of the approaches to prevent and manage Q fever outbreaks will require a multisectorial approach and strengthening of community education, communication and engagement so that all stakeholders become an integrated part of outbreak mitigation and response.

SUBMITTER: Tan TS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9310758 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, over 300 languages are spoken in Australian homes. People without proficient English from non-English speaking countries may not receive equitable care if their health care workers do not speak their primary language. Use of professional interpreters is considered the gold standard; however, for a variety of reasons, it is often limited to key aspects of care such as diagnosis and consent. With the emergence of mobile technologies, health care workers are increasingly using digital translation tools to fill this gap. However, many of these technologies have not been developed for health care settings and their use has not been evaluated.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate iPad-compatible language translation apps to determine their suitability for enabling everyday conversations in health care settings.MethodsTranslation apps were identified by searching the Apple iTunes Store and published and grey literature. Criteria for inclusion were that the apps were available at no cost, able to translate at least one of the top 10 languages spoken in Australia, and available for use on iPad. Apps that met inclusion criteria were reviewed in 2 stages. Stage 1 was the feature analysis conducted by 2 independent researchers, where apps were evaluated for offline use, input and output methods, and number of languages. Stage 2 was the analysis of suitability for everyday communication in the health care setting, conducted by 2 independent professionals with expertise in translation and cross-cultural communication. Apps that enabled key aspects of care normally within the realm of professional interpreters, such as assessment, treatment and discharge planning, and seeking consent for medical treatments, were considered unsuitable.ResultsIn total, 15 apps were evaluated. Of these, 8 apps contained voice-to-voice and voice-to-text translation options. In addition, 6 apps were restricted to using preset health phrases, whereas 1 app used a combination of free input and preset phrases. However, 5 apps were excluded before stage 2. In addition, 6 of the 10 remaining apps reviewed in stage 2 were specifically designed for health care translation purposes. Of these, 2 apps were rated as suitable for everyday communication in the health care setting-culturally and linguistically diverse Assist and Talk To Me. Both apps contained simple and appropriate preset health phrases and did not contain conversations that are normally within the realm of professional interpreters.ConclusionsAll iPad-compatible translation apps require a degree of caution and consideration when used in health care settings, and none should replace professional interpreters. However, some apps may be suitable for everyday conversations, such as those that enable preset phrases to be translated on subject matters that do not require a professional interpreter. Further research into the use of translation technology for these types of conversations is needed.

Dataset Information

Identifying scenarios and risk factors for Q fever outbreaks using qualitative analysis of expert opinion.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets