ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2025
SARS-CoV-2 genomic contextual data harmonization: recommendations from a mixed methods analysis of COVID-19 case report forms across Canada.
Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2025. 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.
- The Mpox contextual data specification package: a data curation toolkit to support collaborative pathogen genomic surveillance.Microbial genomics · 2026Article
- The Canadian VirusSeq Data Portal and Duotang: open resources for SARS-CoV-2 viral sequences and genomic epidemiology.Microbial genomics · 2024Article
- Article
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
Abstract
backgroundThe timely sharing of public health information is critical during a pandemic and is an obstacle that Canada has yet to fully address. During the COVID-19 pandemic, sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 genome enhanced our understanding of transmission patterns, aided in identifying variants of concern, and supported the development and evaluation of diagnostic tests and vaccines. The Canadian national response faced challenges in aggregating genomic contextual data and carrying out integrated analysis across regions partly due to disparities in COVID-19 case report forms used to capture epidemiological and clinical data that accompanies SARS-CoV-2 sequence data. Such variations delay data integration and make consistent analysis difficult or impossible. The objective of this work was to understand what information was being collected from COVID-19 case report forms used across Canada and identify potential contextual data harmonization issues and solutions.
methodsProvincial/territorial/national Canadian COVID-19 case report forms were subjected to field-by-field comparisons to identify variations in data categorization, structures, formats, types, granularity, ambiguity, and questions asked. Federal epidemiologists were consulted to substantiate the results.
resultsData harmonization issues and common data elements were identified. We make recommendations for better national coordination, integrated databases, and data harmonization tools.
conclusionThis report compares data elements of the various case report forms used across Canada to identify overlaps and differences in the collection method of COVID-19 case information, while also highlighting data harmonization complications and potential solutions. Identifying available data elements will better guide COVID-19 surveillance and research.
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.