ArticlePloS one2024
Data quality assessment of the Enhanced Gonococcal Antimicrobial Surveillance Programme (EGASP), Thailand, 2015-2021.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Gonorrhea Management in High-, Limited- and No-Resource Settings: Implications in the Context of Antimicrobial Resistance.International journal of dermatology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuality assessments of gonococcal surveillance data are critical to improve data validity and to enhance the value of surveillance findings. Detecting data errors by systematic audits identifies areas for quality improvement. We designed and implemented an internal audit process to evaluate the accuracy and completeness of surveillance data for the Thailand Enhanced Gonococcal Antimicrobial Surveillance Programme (EGASP).
methodsWe conducted a data quality audit of source records by comparison with the data stored in the EGASP database for five audit cycles from 2015-2021. Ten percent of culture-confirmed cases of Neisseria gonorrhoeae were randomly sampled along with any cases identified with elevated antimicrobial susceptibility testing results and cases with repeat infections. Incorrect and incomplete data were investigated, and corrective action and preventive actions (CAPA) were implemented. Accuracy was defined as the percentage of identical data in both the source records and the database. Completeness was defined as the percentage of non-missing data from either the source document or the database. Statistical analyses were performed using the t-test and the Fisher's exact test.
resultsWe sampled and reviewed 70, 162, 85, 68, and 46 EGASP records during the five audit cycles. Overall accuracy and completeness in the five audit cycles ranged from 93.6% to 99.4% and 95.0% to 99.9%, respectively. Overall, completeness was significantly higher than accuracy (p = 0.017). For each laboratory and clinical data element, concordance was >85% in all audit cycles except for two laboratory data elements in two audit cycles. These elements significantly improved following identification and CAPA implementation. DISCUSSION: We found a high level of data accuracy and completeness in the five audit cycles. The implementation of the audit process identified areas for improvement. Systematic quality assessments of laboratory and clinical data ensure high quality EGASP surveillance data to monitor for antimicrobial resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae in Thailand.
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.