ArticleAmerican journal of industrial medicine2020
Evaluating Oregon's occupational public health surveillance system based on the CDC updated guidelines.
Article in American journal of industrial medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health Care Providers' Perspectives on Early Warning Systems for Acute Respiratory Infections in Canada: Qualitative Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2026Article
- High acceptability of a national platform for public health genomic data sharing and surveillance in Australia: a mixed methods study.BMC global and public health · 2026Article
- Proposed approaches for public health surveillance: A literature review for the Canadian National HIV Surveillance Program.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2025Article
- Exploring the economic occupational health, safety, and fatal accidents in high-risk industries.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Global variation in antibiotic prescribing guidelines and the implications for decreasing AMR in the future.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Article
- [Evaluation of the Viral Hemorrhagic Fever Surveillance System in the Assaba region, Mauritania (2020-2022)].Medecine tropicale et sante internationale · 2024Article
- An in-depth review of the UNICEF NutriDash platform, lessons learnt and future perspectives: a mixed-methods study.BMJ open · 2023Review
- Evaluation of a technical advisory board for an occupational injury surveillance research project: A qualitative study.Health science reports · 2022Article
- Enhancing global health security in Thailand: Strengths and challenges of initiating a One Health approach to avian influenza surveillance.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2022Article
- Understanding occupational safety and health surveillance: expert consensus on components, attributes and example measures for an evaluation framework.BMC public health · 2022Review
- Public health surveillance in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs: evaluation of the Praedico surveillance system.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Evaluating Oregon's occupational public health surveillance system based on the CDC updated guidelines.American journal of industrial medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Oregon Occupational Public Health Program (OOPHP) monitors occupational health indicators (OHIs) to inform occupational safety and health (OSH) surveillance. In 2018, OOPHP evaluated the performance of the OSH surveillance system and identified areas for future improvement.
methodsFollowing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance systems, the OOPHP evaluation team engaged internal and external stakeholders using a mixed-methods approach. Operational measures for ten surveillance attributes were developed. Multiple data collection methods resulted in credible evidence for evaluation conclusions. Analyses included summary statistics and qualitative analysis of interviews, a focus group, and online surveys.
resultsTwenty stakeholders took part in this evaluation, with an average participation rate of 55%. Results showed the Oregon OSH surveillance system was simple, flexible, and highly accepted by its stakeholders. Funding security presents challenges for stability. A lack of timeliness of OHIs, low relevance of OHIs to local OSH issues, and the system's ineffectual data dissemination all limit the usefulness of the OSH surveillance system. A review of key data sources for the system showed good data quality and predictive value positive, but relatively poor sensitivity and representativeness.
conclusionsThe evaluation team successfully adapted attributes and examples in the CDC guidelines to this Oregon OSH surveillance evaluation. The evaluation findings have informed the development of recommendations for improvements to OOPHP's OSH surveillance. Future research is needed to develop guidance specific to OSH surveillance evaluation.
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.