2012
DOI: 10.1186/1742-7622-9-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Event-based internet biosurveillance: relation to epidemiological observation

Abstract: BackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) collects and publishes surveillance data and statistics for select diseases, but traditional methods of gathering such data are time and labor intensive. Event-based biosurveillance, which utilizes a variety of Internet sources, complements traditional surveillance. In this study we assess the reliability of Internet biosurveillance and evaluate disease-specific alert criteria against epidemiological data.MethodsWe reviewed and compared WHO epidemiological data and… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although for the systems for which information was available, no difference was observed, an effect of the time of posting could not be formally ruled out. Nevertheless, our findings are consistent with other studies: HealthMap detected events around 12 days before WHO publication and ProMED-mail between 2 days and 2 weeks earlier than OIE when events were detected by both sources [22], Argus detected confirmed cases of pandemic (A/H1N1) from 1 to 16 days ahead of WHO for 42 countries [40]. No timeliness differences were found between HealthMap, BioCaster and EpiSPIDER [20].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Although for the systems for which information was available, no difference was observed, an effect of the time of posting could not be formally ruled out. Nevertheless, our findings are consistent with other studies: HealthMap detected events around 12 days before WHO publication and ProMED-mail between 2 days and 2 weeks earlier than OIE when events were detected by both sources [22], Argus detected confirmed cases of pandemic (A/H1N1) from 1 to 16 days ahead of WHO for 42 countries [40]. No timeliness differences were found between HealthMap, BioCaster and EpiSPIDER [20].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Individual researchers may monitor online reports or researchers may use databases that are automatically created or curated by other researchers. Examples of automated databases include HealthMap (Barboza et al, 2014;Brownstein et al, 2010;Chanlekha & Collier, 2010;Collier, 2010Collier, , 2012Freifeld, Mandl, Reis, & Brownstein, 2008;Lyon, Nunn, Grossel, & Burgman, 2012); GENI-DB (Collier & Doan, 2012); Project Argus (Nelson, Li, Reilly, Hardin, & Hartley, 2012;Torii et al, 2011); ProMed-mail (Zhang, Dang, Chen, Thurmond, & Larson, 2009); MiTAP (Zhang et al, 2009); and BioCaster (Lyon et al, 2012).…”
Section: Media Reportsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Media monitoring has been developed in a wide variety of fields (Nelson et al., ; Barboza et al ., ; Riccardo et al ., ). In the area of plant health, media monitoring has a broad range of applications.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%