ArticleBMC health services research2026
Infectious disease surveillance in Dutch hospitals: What's in it for us?
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. 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.
- Infectious disease surveillance in Dutch hospitals: What's in it for us?BMC health services research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has shown the need for multipurpose and sustainable hospital surveillance data. We studied the barriers, facilitators, and preferred requirements for an infectious disease surveillance system in Dutch hospitals to be valuable and feasible from a hospital perspective.
methodsThis study is part of a larger EU4Health Project, UNITED4Surveillance. Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders were conducted, and were subsequently analyzed using a thematic analytic approach.
resultsParticipants discussed surveillance systems for antimicrobial resistance, healthcare-associated infections, and severe acute respiratory infections. Perceived barriers to establishing or maintaining such systems included unclear and/or passive hospital roles, legal challenges, and insufficient resources and capacity. Perceived facilitators included clinically relevant and actionable data, mutually beneficial collaborations between stakeholders, and sufficient support at multiple decision-making levels and across legal, technical, capacity, and financial domains.
conclusionsThis qualitative research provides new insights into the barriers and facilitators in infectious disease surveillance in Dutch hospitals from the hospital perspective since the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. Key stakeholders outlined practical recommendations to improve robust and sustainable infectious disease surveillance in Dutch hospitals: (i) ensure clinically relevant actionable data; (ii) clarify roles and responsibilities; and (iii) collaborate on innovative initiatives.
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.