Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34703874›Full record

ArticleOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2021

Sensitivity and representativeness of one-health surveillance for diseases of zoonotic potential at health facilities relative to household visits in rural Guatemala.

Laura M Grajeda, John P McCracken, Mónica Berger-González, María Reneé López, Danilo Álvarez, Salvador Méndez, Oscar Pérez, Celia Cordón-Rosales, Jakob Zinsstag

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Laura M GrajedaCenter for Health Studies, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City 01015, Guatemala.
John P McCrackenCenter for Health Studies, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City 01015, Guatemala.
Mónica Berger-GonzálezCenter for Health Studies, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City 01015, Guatemala.
María Reneé LópezCenter for Health Studies, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City 01015, Guatemala.
Danilo ÁlvarezCenter for Health Studies, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City 01015, Guatemala.
Salvador MéndezMinistry of Public Health and Social Welfare, Petén, Guatemala.
Oscar PérezMinistry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food, Petén, Guatemala.
Celia Cordón-RosalesCenter for Health Studies, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City 01015, Guatemala.
Jakob ZinsstagSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, PO Box, CH-4002 Basel, Switzerland.
Universidad del Valle de Guatemala · GTMinistry of Public Health and Social Assistance · GTUniversity of Georgia · USSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most human and animal disease notification systems are unintegrated and passive, resulting in underreporting. Active surveillance can complement passive efforts, but because they are resource-intensive, their attributes must be evaluated. We assessed the sensitivity and representativeness of One-Health surveillance conducted at health facilities compared to health facilities plus monthly household visits in three rural communities of Guatemala. From September 2017 to November 2018, we screened humans for acute diarrheal, febrile and respiratory infectious syndromes and canines, swine, equines and bovines for syndromic events or deaths. We estimated the relative sensitivity as the incidence rate ratio of detecting an event in health facility surveillance compared to household surveillance from Poisson models. We used interaction terms between the surveillance method and sociodemographic factors or time trends to assess effect modification as a measure of relative representativeness. We used generalized additive models with smoothing splines to model incidence over time by surveillance method. We randomized 216 households to health facility surveillance and 198 to health facility surveillance plus monthly household visits. Health facility surveillance alone was less sensitive than when combined with household surveillance by 0.42 (95% CI: 0.34, 0.53), 0.56 (95% CI: 0.39, 0.79), 0.02 (95% CI: 0.00, 0.10), 0.28 (95% CI: 0.15, 0.50) and 0.22 (95% CI: 0.03, 0.92) times for human acute infections, human severe acute infections, and deaths in canines, swine and equines, respectively. Health facility surveillance alone underrepresented Spanish speakers (interaction

Indexed as

GuatemalaHealth facility surveillanceHousehold surveillanceOne-health surveillanceRepresentativenessSensitivity

Identifiers

PMID34703874
PMCPMC8524745
OpenAlexW3206561214

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.