Public reporting guidelines for outbreak data: Enabling accountability for effective outbreak response by developing standards for transparency and uniformity
Gregoire, V.; Zhu, A. W.; Brown, C. M.; Brownstein, J. S.; Cardo, D.; Cumming, F.; Danila, R.; Donnelly, C. A.; Duchin, J. S.; Fill, M.-M. A.; Fraser, C.; Fullerton, K.; Funk, S.; George, D.; Hopkins, S.; Kraemer, M. U. G.; Layton, M.; Lessler, J.; Lynfield, R.; McCaw, J. M.; McPherson, T. D.; Moore, Z.; Morgan, O.; Riley, S.; Rosenfeld, R.; Samoff, E.; Schaffner, W.; Shaffner, J.; Sturm, R.; Terashita, D.; Walke, H.; Washington, R. E.; Rivers, C. M.
Show abstract
Currently, there are few standards for what essential information about an infectious disease outbreak should be reported to the public and when. The content and timeliness of public reporting (e.g. situation reports) is at the discretion of the jurisdiction overseeing the outbreak response, resulting in a substantial heterogeneity in available information. To address this problem, we undertook a consensus process to develop recommendations for what epidemiological information public health authorities should report to the public during an outbreak, including the administrative level and frequency of reporting. We first assembled a steering committee of nine experts representing federal public health, state public health, academia, and international partners to develop a candidate list of reporting items. We then invited 45 experts, 35 of whom agreed to participate in a Delphi panel. Of those, 25 participated in voting in the first round, 25 participated in voting in the second round, and 25 participated in voting in the third round, demonstrating consistent engagement in the consensus-building process. The final stage of the Delphi process consisted of a hybrid consensus meeting to finalize the voting items. This resulted in a final list of nine reporting items representing the minimum set of information to include in publicly available situation reports: Numbers of new confirmed cases, new hospital admissions, new deaths, cumulative confirmed cases, cumulative hospital admissions, and cumulative deaths, each reported weekly and at Administrative level 1 (typically state or province), and stratified by sex, age group, and race/ethnicity. This minimum reporting standard creates a strong framework and guidance for uniform sharing of outbreak information and promotes consistency of data between jurisdictions to enable prompt and effective response.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- COVID-19 outbreak rates and infection attack rates associated with the workplace: a descriptive epidemiological study 91%
- Cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 and associated risk factors among healthcare workers in the Eastern Cape, South Africa 91%
- Epidemiology of COVID-19 and effect of public health interventions, Chennai, India, March - October 2020 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Experience of the COVID-19 pandemic in rural Odisha, India: knowledge, preventative actions, and impacts on daily life 90%
- A rapid review of COVID-19 vaccine prioritization in the U.S.: alignment between Federal guidance and State practice 90%
- Mapping One Health studies and practices that integrate the human, animal and environmental health dimensions: A scoping review protocol 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Tracking changes in reporting of epidemiological data during the COVID-19 pandemic in Southeast Asia: an observational study during the first wave 94%
- Cross-sector Decision Landscape in Response to COVID-19: A Qualitative Analysis of North Carolina Decision-Makers 92%
- Diagnostics for detection and surveillance of priority epidemic-prone diseases in Africa: an assessment of testing capacity and laboratory strengthening needs 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- How do local-level authorities engage in epidemic and pandemic preparedness activities and coordinate with higher levels of government? Survey results from 33 cities 92%
- Urban pandemic response: survey results describing the experiences from twenty-five cities during the COVID-19 pandemic 92%
- How does policy modelling work in practice? A global analysis on the use of epidemiological modelling in health crises 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.