Laboratory Diagnosis of Diphtheria

Cooper, K. E.; Happold, F. C.; Johnstone, Keith; McLeod, J. W.; Woodcock, Hester E. de C.; Zinnemann, K.

doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)61850-0

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Health Rep. 45: 169 (1930). (2) Collins, Selwyn D.: The incidence of poliomyelitis and its crippling effects, as recorded in family surveys. Pub.…”

Section: Acknowledgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The data collected represent samples of cases which occurred in 1944 and 1945, in five areas-A, a large city; B, a small city; C and D, counties, each with a small city and surrounding rural areas; and E, a predominantly rural county. In this paper an analysis is made of material gathered in the study relative to: (1) sources of morbidity data accessible to health departments and (2) the extent to which data from these sources can be used to determine the general level of reporting.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Morbidity Reporting in Local Areas: II. The Problem of Measuring the Completeness of Reporting

West¹

1948

Public Health Reports (1896-1970)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A first step in improving morbidity data is the measurement of the completeness of reporting. Only on the basis of such measurements can the present status of reporting be determined and the effectiveness of measures taken to improve reporting be evaluated. Since the source of most morbidity reports is the local health department, there is particular need for a method which can be used to measure the level of reporting in local health jurisdictions. Two general approaches have been made to the problem in the past: (1) comparison of disease incidence as reported to the health department with that found by sampling and questioning the general population; (2) the use of indices derived from death data and case reports, either as case fatality rates or as the proportion of fatal cases reported before death (1, 2). The first method was used in 1929 and 1930 in connection with attempts to set up a morbidity reporting area for the United States (3). Estimates of the completeness of reporting were also made as by-products of the Hagerstown Morbidity Studies (4, 5) and the National Health Survey (2, 6). Almost 20 years ago, as part of a proposal for setting up a morbidity reporting area, there was some experimentation (in at least three States) with house-to-house surveys of 1 percent of the population to find cases of diphtheria, poliomyelitis, scarlet fever, smallpox, typhoid fever, and tuberculosis. The cases found in these surveys were checked against health department reports to measure the level of reporting. In one State a study covering a sample of 1.7 percent of a total population of 7,000,000 was completed; in a second, a houseto-house survey representing a 1.3 percent population sample was made by public health nurses.

show abstract

“…Health Rep. 45: 169 (1930). (2) Collins, Selwyn D.: The incidence of poliomyelitis and its crippling effects, as recorded in family surveys. Pub.…”

Section: Acknowledgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Morbidity Reporting in Local Areas: II. The Problem of Measuring the Completeness of Reporting

West¹

1948

Public Health Reports (1896-1970)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In such a case the rising mortality in some areas would be partly balanced by falling mortality in others, and an epidemic plateau would be produced as in Berlin in 1927-28-29 instead of a sharp epidemic spike as in Leeds, Hull or Dundee. However that may be and in spite of a higher case mortality rate for intermedius than for gravis in a number of areas (Liverpool, Romford and Manchester, in 1933), no record has yet been obtained of an area in which intermedius has been the predominant strain during a period of epidemic incidence of diphtheria or of high death rate per 100,000 of population (18,24,34,58,63,76,90,115,149). In those instances in which figures for death rate per 100,000 in the areas concerned at the time of observation are available, they vary from 14 in Glasgow in 1934 to 3 in Dundee in 1934 and Edinburgh in 1935.…”

Section: Consideration Of the Types In Their Significance As Epidemicmentioning

confidence: 99%