Every public health monitoring operation faces important decisions in its design phase. These include information sources to be used, the aggregation of data in space and time, the filtering of data records for required sensitivity, and the design of content delivery for users. Some of these decisions are dictated by available data limitations, others by objectives and resources of the organization doing the
surveillance. Most such decisions involve three characteristic tradeoffs: how much to monitor for exceptional vs customary health threats, the level of aggregation of the monitoring, and the degree of automation to be used.
The first tradeoff results from heightened concern for bioterrorism and pandemics, while everyday threats involve endemic disease events such as seasonal outbreaks. A system focused on bioterrorist attacks is scenario-based, concerned with unusual diagnoses or patient distributions, and likely to include attack hypothesis testing and tracking tools. A system at the other end of this continuum has broader syndrome groupings and is more concerned with general anomalous levels at manageable alert rates.
Major aggregation tradeoffs are temporal, spatial, and syndromic. Bioterrorism fears have shortened the time scale of health monitoring from monthly or weekly to near-real-time. The spatial scale of monitoring is a function of the spatial resolution of data recorded and allowable for use as well as the monitoring institution’s purview and its capacity to collect, analyze and investigate localized outbreaks.
Automation tradeoffs involve the use of data processing to collect information, analyze it for anomalies, and make investigation and response decisions. The first of these uses has widespread acceptance, while in the latter two the degree of automation is a subject of ongoing controversy and research. To what degree can human judgment in alerting/response decisions be automated? What are the level and frequency of human inspection and adjustment? Should monitoring frequency change during elevated threat conditions?
All of these decisions affect monitoring tools and practices as well as funding for related research.
Objective
This purpose of this effort is to show how the goals and capabilities of health monitoring institutions can shape the selection, design, and usage of tools for automated disease surveillance systems.