Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29026452›Full record

ArticleOnline journal of public health informatics2017

Leveraging public health's participation in a Health Information Exchange to improve communicable disease reporting.

Ian Painter, Debra Revere, P Joseph Gibson, Janet Baseman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Online journal of public health informatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

4 authors.

Ian PainterDepartment of Health Services, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WAUSA.
Debra RevereDepartment of Health Services, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WAUSA.
P Joseph GibsonMarion County Public Health Department, Indianapolis, INUSA.
Janet BasemanDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WAUSA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInfectious diseases can appear and spread rapidly. Timely information about disease patterns and trends allows public health agencies to quickly investigate and efficiently contain those diseases. But disease case reporting to public health has traditionally been paper-based, resulting in somewhat slow, burdensome processes. Fortunately, the expanding use of electronic health records and health information exchanges has created opportunities for more rapid, complete, and easily managed case reporting and investigation. To assess how this new service might impact the efficiency and quality of a public health agency's case investigations, we compared the timeliness of usual case investigation to that of case investigations based on case report forms that were partially pre-populated with electronic data.

interventionBetween September 2013-March 2014, chlamydia disease report forms for certain clinics in Indianapolis were electronically pre-populated with clinical, lab and patient data available through the Indiana Health Information Exchange, then provided to the patient’s doctor. Doctors could then sign the form and deliver it to public health for investigation and population-level disease tracking. Methods: We utilized a novel matched case analysis of timeliness changes in receipt and processing of communicable disease report forms. Each Chlamydia cases reported with the pre-populated form were matched to cases reported in usual ways. We assessed the time from receipt of the case at the public health agency: 1) inclusion of the case into the public health surveillance system and 2) to close to case. A hierarchical random effects model was used to compare mean difference in each outcome between the target cases and the matched cases, with random intercepts for case.

resultsTwenty-one Chlamydia cases were reported to the public health agency using the pre-populated form. Sixteen of these pre-populated form cases were matched to at least one other case, with a mean of 23 matches per case. The mean Reporting Lag for the pre-populated form cases was 2.5 days, which was 2.7 days shorter than the mean Reporting Lag for the matched controls (p = <0.001). The mean time to close a pre-populated form case was 4.7 days, which was 0.2 days shorter than time to close for the matched controls (p = 0.792).

conclusionsUse of pre-populated forms significantly decreased the time it took for the local public health agency to begin documenting and closing chlamydia case investigations. Thoughtful use of electronic health data for case reporting may decrease the per-case workload of public health agencies, and improve the timeliness of information about the pattern and spread of disease.

Indexed as

Communicable DiseasesDisease NotificationElectronic health recordsHealth information exchangePublic Health Surveillance

Identifiers

PMID29026452
PMCPMC5630274

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.