Global Capacity for Emerging Infectious Disease Detection, 1996–2014

Kluberg, Sheryl A.; Mekaru, Sumiko R.; McIver, David J; Madoff, Lawrence C.; Crawley, Adam W.; Smolinski, Mark S.; Brownstein, John S.

doi:10.3201/eid2210.151956

Cited by 47 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 33 Nevertheless, minimizing delays in discovering and declaring disease outbreaks remains a global priority. 81 Prospectively, vertical disease surveillance systems (e.g. population-based surveys for HIV/AIDS, case reporting for malaria and cohort monitoring for tuberculosis) could be used and adapted when developing and maintaining the surveillance core capacity of IHR (2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons learnt from implementation of the International Health Regulations: a systematic review

Suthar

Allen²,

Cifuentes

et al. 2017

Bull. World Health Organ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo respond to the World Health Assembly call for dissemination of lessons learnt from countries that have begun implementing the International Health Regulations, 2005 revision; IHR (2005).MethodsIn November 2015, we conducted a systematic search of the following online databases and sources: PubMed®, Embase®, Global Health, Scopus, World Health Organization (WHO) Global Index Medicus, WHO Bulletin on IHR Implementation and the International Society for Disease Surveillance. We included identified studies and reports summarizing national experience in implementing any of the IHR (2005) core capacities or their components. We excluded studies that were theoretical or referred to IHR (1969). Qualitative systematic review methodology, including meta-ethnography, was used for qualitative synthesis.FindingsWe analysed 51 articles from 77 countries representing all WHO Regions. The meta-syntheses identified a total of 44 lessons learnt across the eight core capacities of IHR (2005). Major themes included the need to mobilize and sustain political commitment; to adapt global requirements based on local sociocultural, epidemiological, health system and economic contexts; and to conduct baseline and follow-up assessments to monitor the status of IHR (2005) implementation.ConclusionAlthough experiences of IHR (2005) implementation covered a wide global range, more documentation from Africa and Eastern Europe is needed. We did not find specific areas of weakness in monitoring IHR (2005); sustained monitoring of all core capacities is required to ensure effective systems. These lessons learnt could be adapted by countries in the process of meeting IHR (2005) requirements.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons learnt from implementation of the International Health Regulations: a systematic review

Suthar

Allen²,

Cifuentes

et al. 2017

Bull. World Health Organ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Timeliness was estimated for each event by computing the gap in time between the initial event date and the date of report by the WHO DON reports. Reporting timeliness has been used as a proxy measure for surveillance and reporting capacity in prior analyses, and provides a useful summary metric of the capability of these systems 13 16 26…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing global preparedness for the next pandemic: development and application of an Epidemic Preparedness Index

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionRobust metrics for national-level preparedness are critical for assessing global resilience to epidemic and pandemic outbreaks. However, existing preparedness assessments focus primarily on public health systems or specific legislative frameworks, and do not measure other essential capacities that enable and support public health preparedness and response.MethodsWe developed an Epidemic Preparedness Index (EPI) to assess national-level preparedness. The EPI is global, covering 188 countries. It consists of five subindices measuring each country’s economic resources, public health communications, infrastructure, public health systems and institutional capacity. To evaluate the construct validity of the EPI, we tested its correlation with proxy measures for preparedness and response capacity, including the timeliness of outbreak detection and reporting, as well as vaccination rates during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic.ResultsThe most prepared countries were concentrated in Europe and North America, while the least prepared countries clustered in Central and West Africa and Southeast Asia. Better prepared countries were found to report infectious disease outbreaks more quickly and to have vaccinated a larger proportion of their population during the 2009 pandemic.ConclusionThe EPI measures a country’s capacity to detect and respond to infectious disease events. Existing tools, such as the Joint External Evaluation (JEE), have been designed to measure preparedness within a country over time. The EPI complements the JEE by providing a holistic view of preparedness and is constructed to support comparative risk assessment between countries. The index can be updated rapidly to generate global estimates of pandemic preparedness that can inform strategy and resource allocation.

show abstract

“…Moreover, availability of health data based on traditional public health surveillance is usually constrained by time, bureaucracy, and staffing, with a lag of 2 weeks for the best systems [24], partial notifications in high burden settings [25], or even complete lack of reporting due to political instability as recently evidenced [26]. Timely disease reporting is critical for preparedness and executable realtime interventions to curb outbreaks [27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Google Health Trends performance reflecting dengue incidence for the Brazilian states

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Dengue fever is a mosquito-borne infection transmitted by Aedes aegypti and mainly found in tropical and subtropical regions worldwide. Since its re-introduction in 1986, Brazil has become a hotspot for dengue and has experienced yearly epidemics. As a notifiable infectious disease, Brazil uses a passive epidemiological surveillance system to collect and report cases; however, dengue burden is underestimated. Thus, Internet data streams may complement surveillance activities by providing real-time information in the face of reporting lags. Methods: We analyzed 19 terms related to dengue using Google Health Trends (GHT), a free-Internet data-source, and compared it with weekly dengue incidence between 2011 to 2016. We correlated GHT data with dengue incidence at the national and state-level for Brazil while using the adjusted R squared statistic as primary outcome measure (0/1). We used survey data on Internet access and variables from the official census of 2010 to identify where GHT could be useful in tracking dengue dynamics. Finally, we used a standardized volatility index on dengue incidence and developed models with different variables with the same objective. Results: From the 19 terms explored with GHT, only seven were able to consistently track dengue. From the 27 states, only 12 reported an adjusted R squared higher than 0.8; these states were distributed mainly in the Northeast, Southeast, and South of Brazil. The usefulness of GHT was explained by the logarithm of the number of Internet users in the last 3 months, the total population per state, and the standardized volatility index. Conclusions: The potential contribution of GHT in complementing traditional established surveillance strategies should be analyzed in the context of geographical resolutions smaller than countries. For Brazil, GHT implementation should be analyzed in a case-by-case basis. State variables including total population, Internet usage in the last 3 months, and the standardized volatility index could serve as indicators determining when GHT could complement dengue state level surveillance in other countries.

show abstract

Global Capacity for Emerging Infectious Disease Detection, 1996–2014

Abstract: Timeliness of global outbreak discovery and public communication have gradually improved, but progress has slowed in recent years.

Cited by 47 publications

References 23 publications

Lessons learnt from implementation of the International Health Regulations: a systematic review

Lessons learnt from implementation of the International Health Regulations: a systematic review

Assessing global preparedness for the next pandemic: development and application of an Epidemic Preparedness Index

Google Health Trends performance reflecting dengue incidence for the Brazilian states

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About