MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2793426209 · doi:10.14745/ccdr.v43i06a03

Evaluating the timeliness of reporting in a First Nations communicable diseases program

2017· article· en· W2793426209 sur OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Amy Lam, Samuel G. Woods, Nnamdi Ndubuka

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanada Communicable Disease Report · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Établissements canadiensPrince Albert Grand CouncilPublic Health Agency of Canada
Organismes subventionnairesPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
Mots-clésCommunicable diseaseMedicineEnvironmental healthShigellosisOutbreakPublic healthNon-communicable diseaseNotifiable diseaseChristian ministryGeographyPopulation

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: Timely reporting of communicable diseases is necessary to enable a prompt response to mitigate and control outbreaks.This is especially true among First Nations communities due to a number of factors, including unique social determinants of health, which can contribute to rapid disease transmission.Objective: To assess the timeliness of reporting for 12 notifiable communicable diseases in the Northern Inter-Tribal Health Authority, which includes 33 First Nations on-reserve communities in Northern Saskatchewan, Canada, and to assess whether there were differences in reporting times depending on degree of remoteness of community, season or year.Methods: Data for four sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and eight other communicable diseases were abstracted from the integrated Public Health Information System (iPHIS) between 2008 and 2013 and compared against the targets set for reporting in the Saskatchewan Communicable Disease Control Manual.The reporting time was defined as the duration from client exposure or presentation at clinic to the case notification day at Saskatchewan's Ministry of Health.Communicable diseases were evaluated for proportion of cases reported within recommended time, and mean reporting time.Geographical and reporting data were also recorded to assess variations in reporting time among different northern communities and according to season or year.Results: A total of 9,767 records were identified for the 12 diseases; all had a 14-day recommended reporting time, with the exception of shigellosis, which had a three-day reporting time.Overall, 93.6% of the diseases were reported in the recommended reporting time, although there was variability among the diseases.All four of the STIs (chlamydia, gonococcal infections, HIV and syphilis) had over 90% of cases reported within the 14-day recommended time period.Other communicable diseases reporting times varied from a high of 93.4% for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), 91.7% for lab-confirmed influenza and 89.1% for streptococcal A-invasive disease to a low of 16.2% for shigellosis and 12.2% for pertussis.Salmonellosis and pneumococcal-invasive disease were intermediary with 77.4% and 72.2%, respectively.Mean reporting times indicated that eight of the 12 diseases (66.7%) had reporting times similar to or better than recommended times.There appeared to be a correlation between longer reporting periods and the more northern communities.There were no seasonal variations found but yearly-trend analysis demonstrated an anomalous year in 2011, in which all communicable diseases with the exception of STIs experienced a peak in reporting delays.Conclusion: Overall, communicable disease reporting in this northern health authority program met recommended reporting times, although there were variations according to the disease, the area reporting and the year.Further research is needed to understand these variations in order to inform efforts to strengthen communicable disease surveillance among First Nations communities.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,025
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,894
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,210

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0250,057
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,177
Tête enseignante GPT0,502
Écart entre enseignants0,326 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2017
Routes d'admission4
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanada Communicable Disease ReportMême sujetIndigenous Studies and EcologyTravaux en français237 207