ArticlePLOS global public health2024
A comparative study of influenza surveillance systems and administrative data in England during the 2022-2023 season.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recommendations for the analysis of leading indicators in epidemic surveillance.PLOS digital health · 2026Review
- Long-term retrospective analysis of seasonal influenza epidemic patterns in Southeastern Province of China: based on case reports, syndromic, and pathogenic surveillance.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate and representative surveillance is essential for understanding the impact of influenza on healthcare systems. During the 2022-2023 influenza season, the Northern Hemisphere experienced its most significant epidemic wave since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Concurrently, new surveillance systems, developed in response to the pandemic, became available within health services. In this study, we analysed per capita admission rates from National Health Service hospital Trusts across four surveillance systems in England during the winter of 2022-2023. We examined differences in reporting timeliness, data completeness, and regional coverage, modelling key epidemic metrics including the maximum admission rates, cumulative seasonal admissions, and growth rates by fitting generalised additive models at national and regional levels. From modelling the admission rates per capita, we find that different surveillance systems yield varying estimates of key epidemiological metrics, both spatially and temporally. While national data from these systems generally align on the maximum admission rate and growth trends, discrepancies emerge at the subnational level, particularly in the cumulative admission rate estimates, with notable issues observed in London and the East of England. The rapid growth and decay phases of the epidemic contributed to higher uncertainty in these estimates, especially in regions with variable data quality. The study highlights that the choice of surveillance system can significantly influence the interpretation of influenza trends, especially at the subnational level, where regional disparities may mask true epidemic dynamics. Comparing multiple data sources enhances our understanding of the impact of seasonal influenza epidemics and highlights the limitations of relying on a single system.
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.