Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33958393›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2021

Challenges in reported COVID-19 data: best practices and recommendations for future epidemics.

Rinette Badker, Kierste Miller, Chris Pardee, Ben Oppenheim, Nicole Stephenson, Benjamin Ash, Tanya Philippsen, Christopher Ngoon, Partrick Savage, Cathine Lam and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing 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

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Prediction models for COVID-19 disease outcomes.Emerging microbes & infections · 2024
    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

11 authors.

Rinette BadkerMetabiota Inc, San Francisco, California, USA rbadker@metabiota.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4391-9685
Kierste MillerStockguard Inc, San Francisco, California, USA.
Chris PardeeMetabiota Inc, San Francisco, California, USA.
Ben OppenheimMetabiota Inc, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1487-3534
Nicole StephensonMetabiota Inc, San Francisco, California, USA.
Benjamin AshMetabiota Inc, San Francisco, California, USA.
Tanya PhilippsenMetabiota Inc, San Francisco, California, USA.
Christopher NgoonMetabiota Inc, San Francisco, California, USA.
Partrick SavageMetabiota Inc, San Francisco, California, USA.
Cathine LamMetabiota Inc, San Francisco, California, USA.
Nita MadhavMetabiota Inc, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8077-330X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The proliferation of composite data sources tracking the COVID-19 pandemic emphasises the need for such databases during large-scale infectious disease events as well as the potential pitfalls due to the challenges of combining disparate data sources. Multiple organisations have attempted to standardise the compilation of disparate data from multiple sources during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, each composite data source can use a different approach to compile data and address data issues with varying results.We discuss some best practices for researchers endeavouring to create such compilations while discussing three key categories of challenges: (1) data dissemination, which includes discrepant estimates and varying data structures due to multiple agencies and reporting sources generating public health statistics on the same event; (2) data elements, such as date formats and location names, lack standardisation, and differing spatial and temporal resolutions often create challenges when combining sources; and (3) epidemiological factors, including missing data, reporting lags, retrospective data corrections and changes to case definitions that cannot easily be addressed by the data compiler but must be kept in mind when reviewing the data.Efforts to reform the global health data ecosystem should bear such challenges in mind. Standards and best practices should be developed and incorporated to yield more robust, transparent and interoperable data. Since no standards exist yet, we have highlighted key challenges in creating a comprehensive spatiotemporal view of outbreaks from multiple, often discrepant, reporting sources and provided guidelines to address them. In general, we caution against an over-reliance on fully automated systems for integrating surveillance data and strongly advise that epidemiological experts remain engaged in the process of data assessment, integration, validation and interpretation to identify, diagnose and resolve data challenges.

Indexed as

COVID-19Research DesignHumansCOVID-19epidemiologypublic health

Identifiers

PMID33958393
PMCPMC8103560

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.