An Electronic Disease Early Warning System in Sana’a Governorate, Yemen: Evaluation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electronic Disease Early Warning System (eDEWS) is one of the effective programs in epidemiological surveillance. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the strengths and weaknesses of eDEWS in Sana'a governorate, determine its usefulness, and assess its performance in terms of the system attributes, including simplicity, flexibility, data quality, acceptability, representativeness, timeliness, and stability. METHODS: Updated guidelines on the evaluation of public health surveillance from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) were used to evaluate the eDEWS in Sana'a governorate. Stakeholders from different levels were interviewed about the performance of the eDEWS. RESULTS: The overall score for the usefulness of the eDEWS was good (mean=83%). The overall system performance was good (86%). The highest attribute score was 100% for representativeness and the lowest score was 70% for stability. The system simplicity and acceptability were good. Although the system representativeness and flexibility were excellent, the stability was average. System completeness and timeliness were 100%. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, eDEWS in Yemen is useful and met its main objective. The overall level of system performance was good.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".