MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790999431 · doi:10.2196/publichealth.7375

A Participatory System for Preventing Pandemics of Animal Origins: Pilot Study of the Participatory One Health Disease Detection (PODD) System

2018· article· en· W2790999431 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Terdsak Yano, Somphorn Phornwisetsirikun, Patipat Susumpow, Surasing Visrutaratna, Karoon Chanachai, Polowat Phetra, Warangkhana Chaisowwong, Pairat Trakarnsirinont, Phonpat Hemwan, Boontuan Kaewpinta, Charuk Singhapreecha, Khwanchai Kreausukon, Arisara Charoenpanyanet, Chongchit Sripun Robert, Lamar Robert, Pranee Rodtian, Suteerat Mahasing, Ekkachai Laiya, Sakulrat Pattamakaew, Taweesart Tankitiyanon, Chalutwan Sansamur, Lertrak Srikitjakarn

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicZoonotic diseases and public health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutbreakDisease surveillanceCitizen journalismPhoneDiseaseCitizen scienceMedicinePandemicEnvironmental healthBusinessInfectious disease (medical specialty)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Computer scienceBiologyVirologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Aiming for early disease detection and prompt outbreak control, digital technology with a participatory One Health approach was used to create a novel disease surveillance system called Participatory One Health Disease Detection (PODD). PODD is a community-owned surveillance system that collects data from volunteer reporters; identifies disease outbreak automatically; and notifies the local governments (LGs), surrounding villages, and relevant authorities. This system provides a direct and immediate benefit to the communities by empowering them to protect themselves. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the PODD system for the rapid detection and control of disease outbreaks. METHODS: The system was piloted in 74 LGs in Chiang Mai, Thailand, with the participation of 296 volunteer reporters. The volunteers and LGs were key participants in the piloting of the PODD system. Volunteers monitored animal and human diseases, as well as environmental problems, in their communities and reported these events via the PODD mobile phone app. LGs were responsible for outbreak control and provided support to the volunteers. Outcome mapping was used to evaluate the performance of the LGs and volunteers. RESULTS: LGs were categorized into one of the 3 groups based on performance: A (good), B (fair), and C (poor), with the majority (46%,34/74) categorized into group B. Volunteers were similarly categorized into 4 performance groups (A-D), again with group A showing the best performance, with the majority categorized into groups B and C. After 16 months of implementation, 1029 abnormal events had been reported and confirmed to be true reports. The majority of abnormal reports were sick or dead animals (404/1029, 39.26%), followed by zoonoses and other human diseases (129/1029, 12.54%). Many potentially devastating animal disease outbreaks were detected and successfully controlled, including 26 chicken high mortality outbreaks, 4 cattle disease outbreaks, 3 pig disease outbreaks, and 3 fish disease outbreaks. In all cases, the communities and animal authorities cooperated to apply community contingency plans to control these outbreaks, and community volunteers continued to monitor the abnormal events for 3 weeks after each outbreak was controlled. CONCLUSIONS: By design, PODD initially targeted only animal diseases that potentially could emerge into human pandemics (eg, avian influenza) and then, in response to community needs, expanded to cover human health and environmental health issues.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicZoonotic diseases and public healthFrench-language works237,207