Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18755992›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Understanding detection performance in public health surveillance: modeling aberrancy-detection algorithms.

David L Buckeridge, Anna Okhmatovskaia, Samson Tu, Martin O'Connor, Csongor Nyulas, Mark A Musen

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Adjusting outbreak detection algorithms for surveillance during epidemic and non-epidemic periods.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2012
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Software-engineering challenges of building and deploying reusable problem solvers.Artificial intelligence for engineering design, analysis and manufacturing : AI EDAM · 2009
    Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

David L BuckeridgeDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. david.buckeridge@mcgill.ca
Anna Okhmatovskaia
Samson Tu
Martin O'Connor
Csongor Nyulas
Mark A Musen

Funding

A Resource for Biomedical Ontologies and Knowledge BasesP41LM007885 · NLM · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI MUSEN, MARK A · 2003 to 2010
$6.4M
A Computational Testbed for Biosurveillance MethodsR01PH000027 · PH · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI MUSEN, MARK A · 2006 to 2007
$1.4M
NLM NIH HHS LM007885NLM NIH HHS P41 LM007885PHPPO CDC HHS 5R01PH000027PHPPO CDC HHS R01 PH000027
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveStatistical aberrancy-detection algorithms play a central role in automated public health systems, analyzing large volumes of clinical and administrative data in real-time with the goal of detecting disease outbreaks rapidly and accurately. Not all algorithms perform equally well in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and timeliness in detecting disease outbreaks and the evidence describing the relative performance of different methods is fragmented and mainly qualitative.

designWe developed and evaluated a unified model of aberrancy-detection algorithms and a software infrastructure that uses this model to conduct studies to evaluate detection performance. We used a task-analytic methodology to identify the common features and meaningful distinctions among different algorithms and to provide an extensible framework for gathering evidence about the relative performance of these algorithms using a number of evaluation metrics. We implemented our model as part of a modular software infrastructure (Biological Space-Time Outbreak Reasoning Module, or BioSTORM) that allows configuration, deployment, and evaluation of aberrancy-detection algorithms in a systematic manner. MEASUREMENT: We assessed the ability of our model to encode the commonly used EARS algorithms and the ability of the BioSTORM software to reproduce an existing evaluation study of these algorithms.

resultsUsing our unified model of aberrancy-detection algorithms, we successfully encoded the EARS algorithms, deployed these algorithms using BioSTORM, and were able to reproduce and extend previously published evaluation results.

conclusionThe validated model of aberrancy-detection algorithms and its software implementation will enable principled comparison of algorithms, synthesis of results from evaluation studies, and identification of surveillance algorithms for use in specific public health settings.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsSoftwareDisease OutbreaksHumansModels, TheoreticalPopulation Surveillance

Identifiers

PMID18755992
PMCPMC2585528

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.