ArticleJournal of public health (Oxford, England)2018
Automated influenza case detection for public health surveillance and clinical diagnosis using dynamic influenza prevalence method.
Article in Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advocating the potential of artificial intelligence for syndrome discovery in syndromic surveillance systems: A scoping review.iScience · 2026Review
- Natural language processing and machine learning of electronic health records for prediction of first-time suicide attempts.JAMIA open · 2021Article
- Development and Evaluation of a Fully Automated Surveillance System for Influenza-Associated Hospitalization at a Multihospital Health System in Northeast Ohio.Applied clinical informatics · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: To assess the performance of a Bayesian case detector (BCD) for influenza surveillance and clinical diagnosis. Methods: BCD uses a Bayesian network classifier to compute the posterior probability of a patient having influenza based on 31 findings from narrative clinical notes. To assess the potential for disease surveillance, we calculated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to indicate BCD's ability to differentiate between influenza and non-influenza encounters in emergency department settings. To assess the potential for clinical diagnosis, we measured AUC for diagnosing influenza cases among encounters having influenza-like illnesses. We also evaluated the performance of BCD using dynamically estimated influenza prevalence, and measured sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value. Results: For influenza surveillance, BCD differentiated between influenza and non-influenza encounters well with an AUC of 0.90 and 0.97 with dynamic influenza prevalence (P < 0.0001). For clinical diagnosis, the addition of dynamic influenza prevalence to BCD significantly improved AUC from 0.63 to 0.85 to distinguish influenza from other causes of influenza-like illness. Conclusions and policy implications: BCD can serve as an influenza surveillance and a differential diagnosis tool via our dynamic prevalence approach. It enhances the communication between public health and clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.