Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28473308›Full record

ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2017

Saúde na Copa: The World's First Application of Participatory Surveillance for a Mass Gathering at FIFA World Cup 2014, Brazil.

Onicio Leal Neto, George Santiago Dimech, Marlo Libel, Wayner Vieira de Souza, Eduarda Cesse, Mark Smolinski, Wanderson Oliveira, Jones Albuquerque

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Use of Digital Tools in Arbovirus Surveillance: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Onicio Leal Neto *EpitrackRecifeBrazil.ORCID 0000-0001-5785-1867
George Santiago DimechPernambuco Health DepartamentRecifeBrazil.ORCID 0000-0003-0295-3393
Marlo LibelSkoll Global Threats FundPandemics TeamSan Francisco, CAUnited States.ORCID 0000-0002-0019-1279
Wayner Vieira de SouzaAggeu Magalhães Research CenterDepartament of Public HealthRecifeBrazil.ORCID 0000-0002-0939-9332
Eduarda CesseAggeu Magalhães Research CenterDepartament of Public HealthRecifeBrazil.ORCID 0000-0001-5745-3981
Mark SmolinskiSkoll Global Threats FundPandemics TeamSan Francisco, CAUnited States.ORCID 0000-0002-5713-8241
Wanderson OliveiraBrazil's Ministry of HealthGeneral Coordination of Public Health Emergencies ResponseBrasiliaBrazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9662-1930
Jones AlbuquerqueEpitrackRecifeBrazil.ORCID 0000-0001-8313-1687
Fife Council · GBUnited Nations Population Fund · USEnvironmental Protection Agency · DKHospital de Magalhães Lemos · PTMinistério da Saúde · BRUniversidade de Pernambuco · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 2005 International Health Regulations (IHRs) established parameters for event assessments and notifications that may constitute public health emergencies of international concern. These requirements and parameters opened up space for the use of nonofficial mechanisms (such as websites, blogs, and social networks) and technological improvements of communication that can streamline the detection, monitoring, and response to health problems, and thus reduce damage caused by these problems. Specifically, the revised IHR created space for participatory surveillance to function, in addition to the traditional surveillance mechanisms of detection, monitoring, and response. Participatory surveillance is based on crowdsourcing methods that collect information from society and then return the collective knowledge gained from that information back to society. The spread of digital social networks and wiki-style knowledge platforms has created a very favorable environment for this model of production and social control of information.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to describe the use of a participatory surveillance app, Healthy Cup, for the early detection of acute disease outbreaks during the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup 2014. Our focus was on three specific syndromes (respiratory, diarrheal, and rash) related to six diseases that were considered important in a mass gathering context (influenza, measles, rubella, cholera, acute diarrhea, and dengue fever).

methodsFrom May 12 to July 13, 2014, users from anywhere in the world were able to download the Healthy Cup app and record their health condition, reporting whether they were good, very good, ill, or very ill. For users that reported being ill or very ill, a screen with a list of 10 symptoms was displayed. Participatory surveillance allows for the real-time identification of aggregates of symptoms that indicate possible cases of infectious diseases.

resultsFrom May 12 through July 13, 2014, there were 9434 downloads of the Healthy Cup app and 7155 (75.84%) registered users. Among the registered users, 4706 (4706/7155, 65.77%) were active users who posted a total of 47,879 times during the study period. The maximum number of users that signed up in one day occurred on May 30, 2014, the day that the app was officially launched by the Minister of Health during a press conference. During this event, the Minister of Health announced the special government program Health in the World Cup on national television media. On that date, 3633 logins were recorded, which accounted for more than half of all sign-ups across the entire duration of the study (50.78%, 3633/7155).

conclusionsParticipatory surveillance through community engagement is an innovative way to conduct epidemiological surveillance. Compared to traditional epidemiological surveillance, advantages include lower costs of data acquisition, timeliness of information collected and shared, platform scalability, and capacity for integration between the population being served and public health services.

Indexed as

epidemiologymass gatheringsparticipatory surveillancepublic health

Identifiers

PMID28473308
PMCPMC5438444
OpenAlexW2611898996

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.