Comparison of an Active and Passive Surveillance System of Primary Care Providers for Hepatitis, Measles, Rubella, and Salmonellosis in Vermont

Vogt, Richard L.; LaRue, Denise E; Klaucke, Douglas N.; Jillson, David A.

doi:10.2105/ajph.73.7.795

Cited by 101 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study has ascertained cases through the use of a well-established surveillance methodology shown to be more effective than other methods. 16,17 However, it is likely that there is some degree of underascertainment. Previous reports for studies ascertaining cases through the BOSU have indicated that ascertainment rates usually lie between 75 and 95%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surveillance of intraocular foreign bodies in the UK

Imrie

Cox

Foot

et al. 2007

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To estimate the incidence of penetrating injuries with retained intraocular foreign bodies (IOFBs) in the United Kingdom, and to provide epidemiological data on the aetiology, management, and visual outcome of such injuries. Methods Cases were identified prospectively by active surveillance through the British Ophthalmological Surveillance Unit reporting card system, for the 12-month period June 2004 to May 2005 inclusive. Questionnaire data were obtained from UK ophthalmologists at presentation and 6 months following presentation. Results Data were available on 97 patients at presentation and 95 patients at follow-up. The minimum estimated incidence of IOFBs in the United Kingdom identified in this study was 0.16 per 100 000. All patients were male. Hammering was the most common mechanism of injury, occurring in 62% of patients. The IOFB was found in the anterior segment in 24%, the posterior segment in 73%, and involved both segments in 3%. Endophthalmitis was diagnosed in 9% of patients. Best-corrected visual acuity of the injured eye at final follow-up was 6/12 or better in 67%, 6/18 to 6/60 in 11%, and worse than 6/60 in 22%. Prognostic factors for a poor visual outcome included poor visual acuity at presentation, prolapse of intraocular tissue, development of endophthalmitis, development of retinal detachment, and large size of IOFB. Conclusions The incidence of IOFB in the United Kingdom appears to have reduced compared to previous studies. The majority of patients (67%) retain good visual acuity in the injured eye; however, a significant minority (22%) sustain long-term severe visual loss.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surveillance of intraocular foreign bodies in the UK

Imrie

Cox

Foot

et al. 2007

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Where compliance is better, it is likely that higher proportions of cases are being identified and reported, which is consistent with comparative trials of surveillance methodologies. 2,3 a Two applications were withdrawn and one study was not accepted as being of insufficient public health importance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Researchers are able to ascertain cases using a well-established methodology shown to be more effective than comparable methods. 2,3 The burden on the ophthalmological community is lessened by removing requests from numerous sources for reporting cases of uncommon disorders. 4 BOSU's supplementary activities include providing advice and assistance to research workers on the design of their studies and increasing awareness within the medical profession of the conditions studied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The British Ophthalmological Surveillance Unit: an evaluation of the first 3 years

Foot

Stanford

Rahi³

et al. 2003

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report an evaluation of the British Ophthalmological Surveillance Unit (BOSU), a nationwide active surveillance scheme to assist with the case ascertainment of rare eye conditions. The evaluation assessed participation rates, study applications and research outputs. In addition, through an anonymous postal survey we ascertained the opinions of ophthalmologists regarding the usefulness, levels of feedback, barriers to participation and levels of case ascertainment. Over the first 3 years, the 4-month mean participation rate has improved from 58% to 71%. Ten studies have used this system for case ascertainment. To date three journal publications and 10 conference presentations have reported findings from these studies. It was observed that 582/870 (68%) questionnaires were returned by ophthalmologists, of whom 95% considered BOSU as very or quite useful. In all, 71% reported overall feedback to be sufficient. However, 34% requested greater feedback from research groups. Reported barriers to effective participation were 'having to remember the patient's identity' (52%) and paying for return postage of cards (22%). However, 72% of respondents did not consider the work involved in reporting a case to be prohibitive. Self-reported levels of case ascertainment by ophthalmologists for completed studies ranged between 72% and 95%. This population-based surveillance system provides an effective method for prospective case identification and subsequent data collection. It enables the study of sufficiently representative samples to allow meaningful epidemiological analysis and avoid bias. Its success relies upon the high level of support that it currently receives from ophthalmologists.

show abstract

“…In this study, the existing notifiable disease surveillance system in the United Kingdom is compared with the system in Sri Lanka. Several evaluation studies to identify the strengths and weaknesses of existing infectious disease surveillance systems (passive and/or active) have been reported (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) . However, the literature on comparative studies on disease surveillance systems in two different geographical locations is very limited.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Notifiable disease surveillance in Sri Lanka and the United Kingdom: a comparative study

Chandrasekar

Mahesan

Bath

2013

Sri Lanka J Bio-Medical Informatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Threats posed by new, emerging or re-emerging infectious diseases are taking a global dimension. These diseases are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality around the world and have an influence on the economic growth and development of nations. Several evaluation studies on existing infectious disease surveillance systems (passive and/or active) have been undertaken to identify the strengths and weaknesses in order to improve surveillance activities. Research is also directed towards identifying specific factors that influence the information flow in the notification process of infectious diseases at different levels, such as completeness, timeliness, sensitivity, etc. Studies reported from Sri Lanka and the United Kingdom are very limited. Further, we rarely find any literature on comparative studies on disease surveillance systems in two different geographical locations. In this study in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect data, in Jaffna (Sri Lanka) and Sheffield (UK).Participants were recruited from those who were engaged in work related to the notifiable disease surveillance system at a local level. This research paper reports the advantages and disadvantages of the existing notifiable disease surveillance systems in the United Kingdom and Sri Lanka. In addition, it recommends that receiving notifications from various other sources (including indigenous medical practitioners, public health workers, laboratories and the general public), involvement of laboratories in disease surveillance activities, and computerising the existing surveillance system for notification would enhance the completeness and timeliness of reporting. In addition to epidemiological publications at national level, this study emphasises the importance of regional publications on notifiable disease surveillance.

show abstract

Comparison of an Active and Passive Surveillance System of Primary Care Providers for Hepatitis, Measles, Rubella, and Salmonellosis in Vermont

Abstract: Between June

Cited by 101 publications

References 11 publications

Surveillance of intraocular foreign bodies in the UK

Surveillance of intraocular foreign bodies in the UK

The British Ophthalmological Surveillance Unit: an evaluation of the first 3 years

Notifiable disease surveillance in Sri Lanka and the United Kingdom: a comparative study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About