ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2024
COVID-19 Health Impact: A Use Case for Syndromic Surveillance System Monitoring Based on Primary Care Patient Registries in the Netherlands.
Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exposing the loci of bias: a taxonomical exploration of sources of bias in population mental health research.Population health metrics · 2025Review
- Monitoring Public Health Through a Comprehensive Primary Care Database in the Netherlands: Overview of the Nivel Syndromic Surveillance System.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Article
- Data Resource Profile: Nivel Primary Care Database (Nivel-PCD), The Netherlands.International journal of epidemiology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic challenged societies worldwide. The implementation of mitigation measures to limit the number of SARS-CoV-2 infections resulted in unintended health effects. Objective: The objective of this study is to demonstrate the use of an existing syndromic surveillance system in primary care during a first series of quarterly cross-sectional monitoring cycles, targeting health problems presented in primary care among Dutch youth since August 2021. Methods: Aggregated data from the surveillance system of Nivel Primary Care Database were analyzed quarterly to monitor 20 health problems often reported in the aftermath of disasters and environmental incidents. Results were stratified by age (ie, 0-4, 5-14, and 15-24 years), sex, and region (province). Weekly prevalence rates were calculated as the number of persons consulting their general practitioner in a particular week, using the number of enlisted persons as the denominator. Findings were compared to quarterly survey panel data, collected in the context of the Integrated Health Monitor COVID-19, and the Dutch stringency index values, indicative of the intensity of COVID-19 mitigation measures. Results: Over time, weekly rates pointed to an increased number of consultations for depressive feelings and suicide (attempts) among youth, during and after periods with intensified domestic restrictions. Conclusions: The results illustrate how, from a disaster health research perspective based on the COVID-19 pandemic, health consequences of pandemics could be successfully followed over time using an existing infrastructure for syndromic surveillance and monitoring. Particular areas of health concern can be defined beforehand, and may be modified or expanded during the monitoring activities to track relevant developments. Although an association between patterns and changes in the strictness of mitigation measures might seem probable, claims about causality should be made with caution.
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.