SCM: a practical tool to implement hospital-based syndromic surveillance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Syndromic surveillance has been widely used for the early warning of infectious disease outbreaks, especially in mass gatherings, but the collection of electronic data on symptoms in hospitals is one of the fundamental challenges that must be overcome during operating a syndromic surveillance system. The objective of our study is to describe and evaluate the implementation of a symptom-clicking-module (SCM) as a part of the enhanced hospital-based syndromic surveillance during the 41st World Exposition in Shanghai, China, 2010.The SCM, including 25 targeted symptoms, was embedded in the sentinels' Hospital Information Systems (HIS). The clinicians used SCM to record these information of all the visiting patients, and data were collated and transmitted automatically in daily batches. The symptoms were categorized into seven targeted syndromes using pre-defined criteria, and statistical algorithms were applied to detect temporal aberrations in the data series.SCM was deployed successfully in each sentinel hospital and was operated during the 184-day surveillance period. A total of 1,730,797 patient encounters were recorded by SCM, and 6.1 % (105,352 visits) met the criteria of the seven targeted syndromes. Acute respiratory and gastrointestinal syndromes were reported most frequently, accounted for 92.1 % of reports in all syndromes, and the aggregated time-series presented an obvious day-of-week variation over the study period. In total, 191 aberration signals were triggered, and none of them were identified as outbreaks after verification and field investigation.SCM has acted as a practical tool for recording symptoms in the hospital-based enhanced syndromic surveillance system during the 41st World Exposition in Shanghai, in the context of without a preexisting electronic tool to collect syndromic data in the HIS of the sentinel hospitals.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".