Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36969655›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2023

COVID-19 surveillance: Large decrease in clinical notifications and epidemiological investigation questionnaires for laboratory-confirmed cases after the 2nd epidemic wave, Portugal March 2020-July 2021.

Vasco Ricoca Peixoto, André Vieira, Pedro Aguiar, Alexis Sentis, Carlos Carvalho, Daniel Rhys Thomas, Alexandre Abrantes, Carla Nunes

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Vasco Ricoca PeixotoNOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre, Comprehensive Health Research Center, CHRC, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
André VieiraNOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre, Comprehensive Health Research Center, CHRC, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Pedro AguiarNOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre, Comprehensive Health Research Center, CHRC, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Alexis SentisEpidemiology Department, Epiconcept, Paris, France.
Carlos CarvalhoUnit for Multidisciplinary Research in Biomedicine, Abel Salazar Institute of Biomedical Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Daniel Rhys ThomasCommunicable Disease Surveillance Centre, Public Health Wales, Cardiff, United Kingdom.
Alexandre AbrantesNOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre, Comprehensive Health Research Center, CHRC, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Carla NunesNOVA National School of Public Health, Public Health Research Centre, Comprehensive Health Research Center, CHRC, NOVA University Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In Portugal, COVID-19 laboratory notifications, clinical notifications (CNs), and epidemiological investigation questionnaires (EI) were electronically submitted by laboratories, clinicians, and public health professionals, respectively, to the Portuguese National Epidemiological Surveillance System (SINAVE), as mandated by law. We described CN and EI completeness in SINAVE to inform pandemic surveillance efforts. Methods: We calculated the proportion of COVID-19 laboratory-notified cases without CN nor EI, and without EI by region and age group, in each month, from March 2020 to July 2021. We tested the correlation between those proportions and monthly case counts in two epidemic periods and used Poisson regression to identify factors associated with the outcomes. Results: The analysis included 909,720 laboratory-notified cases. After October 2020, an increase in the number of COVID-19 cases was associated with a decrease in the submissions of CN and EI. By July 2021, 68.57% of cases had no associated CN nor EI, and 96.26% had no EI. Until January 2021, there was a positive correlation between monthly case counts and the monthly proportion of cases without CN nor EI and without EI, but not afterward. Cases aged 75 years or older had a lower proportion without CN nor EI (aRR: 0.842 CI95% 0.839-0.845). When compared to the Norte region, cases from Alentejo, Algarve, and Madeira had a lower probability of having no EI (aRR;0.659 CI 95%0.654-0.664; aRR 0.705 CI 95% 0.7-0.711; and aRR 0.363 CI 95% 0.354-0.373, respectively). Discussion: After January 2021, CN and EI were submitted in a small proportion of laboratory-confirmed cases, varying by age and region. Facing the large number of COVID-19 cases, public health services may have adopted other registry strategies including new surveillance and management tools to respond to operational needs. This may have contributed to the abandonment of official CN and EI submission. Useful knowledge on the context of infection, symptom profile, and other knowledge gaps was no longer adequately supported by SINAVE. Regular evaluation of pandemic surveillance systems' completeness is necessary to inform surveillance improvements and procedures considering dynamic objectives, usefulness, acceptability, and simplicity.

Indexed as

COVID-19HumansLaboratoriesPandemicsPortugalRegistriescompletenessCOVID-19epidemic surveillancenotificationssurveillance attributesurveillance system evaluation

Identifiers

PMID36969655
PMCPMC10035048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read22
table measurements read13
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.