Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36447171›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2022

Effectiveness of early warning systems in the detection of infectious diseases outbreaks: a systematic review.

Rehab Meckawy, David Stuckler, Adityavarman Mehta, Tareq Al-Ahdal, Bradley N Doebbeling

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Drug sales data for gastrointestinal infections surveillance: a systematic review up to 2025.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

5 authors.

Rehab MeckawyPublic Health and Community Medicine Department, Alexandria Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Champollion street, Al Attarin, Alexandria, Egypt. R_Mekawy2120396@alexmed.edu.eg.
David StucklerDepartment of Social and Political Sciences and Dondena Research Center, Bocconi University, Via Roberto Sarfatti, 25, 20100, Milan, MI, Italy.
Adityavarman MehtaUniversity of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
Tareq Al-AhdalInstitute of Global Health (HIGH), Heidelberg University, Neuenheimer feld 130/3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Bradley N DoebbelingCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, 975 S. Myrtle Ave, Tempe, AZ, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobal pandemics have occurred with increasing frequency over the past decade reflecting the sub-optimum operationalization of surveillance systems handling human health data. Despite the wide array of current surveillance methods, their effectiveness varies with multiple factors. Here, we perform a systematic review of the effectiveness of alternative infectious diseases Early Warning Systems (EWSs) with a focus on the surveillance data collection methods, and taking into consideration feasibility in different settings.

methodsWe searched PubMed and Scopus databases on 21 October 2022. Articles were included if they covered the implementation of an early warning system and evaluated infectious diseases outbreaks that had potential to become pandemics. Of 1669 studies screened, 68 were included in the final sample. We performed quality assessment using an adapted CASP Checklist.

resultsOf the 68 articles included, 42 articles found EWSs successfully functioned independently as surveillance systems for pandemic-wide infectious diseases outbreaks, and 16 studies reported EWSs to have contributing surveillance features through complementary roles. Chief complaints from emergency departments' data is an effective EWS but it requires standardized formats across hospitals. Centralized Public Health records-based EWSs facilitate information sharing; however, they rely on clinicians' reporting of cases. Facilitated reporting by remote health settings and rapid alarm transmission are key advantages of Web-based EWSs. Pharmaceutical sales and laboratory results did not prove solo effectiveness. The EWS design combining surveillance data from both health records and staff was very successful. Also, daily surveillance data notification was the most successful and accepted enhancement strategy especially during mass gathering events. Eventually, in Low Middle Income Countries, working to improve and enhance existing systems was more critical than implementing new Syndromic Surveillance approaches.

conclusionsOur study was able to evaluate the effectiveness of Early Warning Systems in different contexts and resource settings based on the EWSs' method of data collection. There is consistent evidence that EWSs compiling pre-diagnosis data are more proactive to detect outbreaks. However, the fact that Syndromic Surveillance Systems (SSS) are more proactive than diagnostic disease surveillance should not be taken as an effective clue for outbreaks detection.

Indexed as

Disease OutbreaksSentinel SurveillanceChecklistHumansInformation DisseminationPandemicsAlertEarly warning systemNotificationPublic health

Identifiers

PMID36447171
PMCPMC9707072

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.