ArticleInternational journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases2021
Evaluating COVID-19 reporting data in the context of testing strategies across 31 low- and middle-income countries.
Article in International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Challenges and Adaptations in COVID-19 Seroprevalence Surveys: Insights from Kinshasa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Spatio-temporal distribution of COVID-19 cases and tuberculosis in four provinces of Sumatra Islands, Indonesia.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Article
- An Ontology to Bridge the Clinical Management of Patients and Public Health Responses for Strengthening Infectious Disease Surveillance: Design Science Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Differences in lethality and diffusion of Covid-19 in countries using different kinds of vaccines.Journal of public health research · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe case count for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the predominant measure used to track epidemiological dynamics and inform policy decision-making. Case counts, however, are influenced by testing rates and strategies, which have varied over time and space. A method to interpret COVID-19 case counts consistently in the context of other surveillance data is needed, especially for data-limited settings in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
methodsStatistical analyses were used to detect changes in COVID-19 surveillance data. The pruned exact linear time change detection method was applied for COVID-19 case counts, number of tests, and test positivity rate over time. With this information, change points were categorized as likely driven by epidemiological dynamics or non-epidemiological influences, such as noise.
findingsHigher rates of epidemiological change detection are more associated with open testing policies than with higher testing rates. This study quantified alignment of non-pharmaceutical interventions with epidemiological changes. LMICs have the testing capacity to measure prevalence with precision if they use randomized testing. Rwanda stands out as a country with an efficient COVID-19 surveillance system. Subnational data reveal heterogeneity in epidemiological dynamics and surveillance.
interpretationRelying solely on case counts to interpret pandemic dynamics has important limitations. Normalizing counts by testing rate mitigates some of these limitations, and an open testing policy is key to efficient surveillance. The study findings can be leveraged by public health officials to strengthen COVID-19 surveillance and support programmatic decision-making.
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.