Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24824806›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Evaluation of an Internet-based monitoring system for influenza-like illness in Sweden.

Moa Rehn, AnnaSara Carnahan, Hanna Merk, Sharon Kühlmann-Berenzon, Ilias Galanis, Annika Linde, Olof Nyrén

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The potential value of crowdsourced surveillance systems in supplementing sentinel influenza networks: the case of France.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2018
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Moa RehnPublic Health Agency of Sweden (Previously Swedish Institute for Communicable Disease Control), Solna, Sweden; European Programme for Intervention Epidemiology Training (EPIET), European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), Stockholm, Sweden.
AnnaSara CarnahanPublic Health Agency of Sweden (Previously Swedish Institute for Communicable Disease Control), Solna, Sweden.
Hanna MerkPublic Health Agency of Sweden (Previously Swedish Institute for Communicable Disease Control), Solna, Sweden; Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institute, Solna, Sweden.
Sharon Kühlmann-BerenzonPublic Health Agency of Sweden (Previously Swedish Institute for Communicable Disease Control), Solna, Sweden.
Ilias GalanisPublic Health Agency of Sweden (Previously Swedish Institute for Communicable Disease Control), Solna, Sweden.
Annika LindePublic Health Agency of Sweden (Previously Swedish Institute for Communicable Disease Control), Solna, Sweden.
Olof NyrénDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institute, Solna, Sweden.
Karolinska Institutet · SEPublic Health Agency of Sweden · SESwedish Institute · SEEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To complement traditional influenza surveillance with data on disease occurrence not only among care-seeking individuals, the Swedish Institute for Communicable Disease Control (SMI) has tested an Internet-based monitoring system (IMS) with self-recruited volunteers submitting weekly on-line reports about their health in the preceding week, upon weekly reminders. We evaluated IMS acceptability and to which extent participants represented the Swedish population. We also studied the agreement of data on influenza-like illness (ILI) occurrence from IMS with data from a previously evaluated population-based system (PBS) with an actively recruited random sample of the population who spontaneously report disease onsets in real-time via telephone/Internet, and with traditional general practitioner based sentinel and virological influenza surveillance, in the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 influenza seasons. We assessed acceptability by calculating the participation proportion in an invited IMS-sample and the weekly reporting proportion of enrolled self-recruited IMS participants. We compared distributions of socio-demographic indicators of self-recruited IMS participants to the general Swedish population using chi-square tests. Finally, we assessed the agreement of weekly incidence proportions (%) of ILI in IMS and PBS with cross-correlation analyses. Among 2,511 invited persons, 166 (6.6%) agreed to participate in the IMS. In each season, 2,552 and 2,486 self-recruited persons participated in the IMS respectively. The weekly reporting proportion among self-recruited participants decreased from 87% to 23% (2011-2012) and 82% to 45% (2012-2013). Women, highly educated, and middle-aged persons were overrepresented among self-recruited IMS participants (p<0.01). IMS (invited and self-recruited) and PBS weekly incidence proportions correlated strongest when no lags were applied (r = 0.71 and r = 0.69, p<0.05). This evaluation revealed socio-demographic misrepresentation and limited compliance among the self-recruited IMS participants. Yet, IMS offered a reasonable representation of the temporal ILI pattern in the community overall during the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 influenza seasons and could be a simple tool for collecting community-based ILI data.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolEducational StatusFemaleHumansIncidenceInfantInfant, NewbornInfluenza, HumanInternetMale

Identifiers

PMID24824806
PMCPMC4019478
OpenAlexW2067059732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.