Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33112762›Full record

ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2020

COVID-19 Surveillance in a Primary Care Sentinel Network: In-Pandemic Development of an Application Ontology.

Simon de Lusignan, Harshana Liyanage, Dylan McGagh, Bhautesh Dinesh Jani, Jorgen Bauwens, Rachel Byford, Dai Evans, Tom Fahey, Trisha Greenhalgh, Nicholas Jones and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Responding to COVID-19 with real-time general practice data in Australia.International journal of medical informatics · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

20 authors.

Simon de LusignanNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8553-2641
Harshana LiyanageNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9738-6349
Dylan McGagh *Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6772-2775
Bhautesh Dinesh JaniGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7348-514X
Jorgen BauwensUniversity Children's Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-2324-2283
Rachel ByfordNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4792-8995
Dai EvansPRIMIS, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9272-3203
Tom FaheyDepartment of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons, Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-5896-5783
Trisha GreenhalghNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2369-8088
Nicholas JonesNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0352-3785
Frances S MairGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9780-1135
Cecilia OkusiNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5575-8527
Vaishnavi ParimalanathanNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0458-9049
Jill P PellGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8898-7035
Julian SherlockNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7427-1936
Oscar TamburisDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Productions, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0130-7915
Manasa TripathyNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9840-3876
Filipa FerreiraNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7717-8486
John WilliamsNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6118-0434
F D Richard HobbsNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7976-7172

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCreating an ontology for COVID-19 surveillance should help ensure transparency and consistency. Ontologies formalize conceptualizations at either the domain or application level. Application ontologies cross domains and are specified through testable use cases. Our use case was an extension of the role of the Oxford Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) to monitor the current pandemic and become an in-pandemic research platform.

objectiveThis study aimed to develop an application ontology for COVID-19 that can be deployed across the various use-case domains of the RCGP RSC research and surveillance activities.

methodsWe described our domain-specific use case. The actor was the RCGP RSC sentinel network, the system was the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the outcomes were the spread and effect of mitigation measures. We used our established 3-step method to develop the ontology, separating ontological concept development from code mapping and data extract validation. We developed a coding system-independent COVID-19 case identification algorithm. As there were no gold-standard pandemic surveillance ontologies, we conducted a rapid Delphi consensus exercise through the International Medical Informatics Association Primary Health Care Informatics working group and extended networks.

resultsOur use-case domains included primary care, public health, virology, clinical research, and clinical informatics. Our ontology supported (1) case identification, microbiological sampling, and health outcomes at an individual practice and at the national level; (2) feedback through a dashboard; (3) a national observatory; (4) regular updates for Public Health England; and (5) transformation of a sentinel network into a trial platform. We have identified a total of 19,115 people with a definite COVID-19 status, 5226 probable cases, and 74,293 people with possible COVID-19, within the RCGP RSC network (N=5,370,225).

conclusionsThe underpinning structure of our ontological approach has coped with multiple clinical coding challenges. At a time when there is uncertainty about international comparisons, clarity about the basis on which case definitions and outcomes are made from routine data is essential.

Indexed as

Biological OntologiesSentinel SurveillanceCOVID-19HumansPandemicsPrimary Health CareCOVID-19medical informaticssentinel surveillance

Identifiers

PMID33112762
PMCPMC7674143

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.