确定 COVID-19 直接影响指标的方法问题:关于发病率、严重程度和死亡率的快速范围审查。

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH European Journal of Public Health Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1093/eurpub/ckae072
Cesar Garriga, Teresa Valero-Gaspar, Carmen Rodriguez-Blazquez, Asuncion Diaz, Péter Bezzegh, Šárka Daňková, Brigid Unim, Luigi Palmieri, Martin Thiβen, Richard Pentz, Šeila Cilović-Lagarija, Anes Jogunčić, Rodrigo Feteira-Santos, Jakov Vuković, Jane Idavain, Anda Curta, Petru Sandu, Matej Vinko, Maria João Forjaz
{"title":"确定 COVID-19 直接影响指标的方法问题:关于发病率、严重程度和死亡率的快速范围审查。","authors":"Cesar Garriga, Teresa Valero-Gaspar, Carmen Rodriguez-Blazquez, Asuncion Diaz, Péter Bezzegh, Šárka Daňková, Brigid Unim, Luigi Palmieri, Martin Thiβen, Richard Pentz, Šeila Cilović-Lagarija, Anes Jogunčić, Rodrigo Feteira-Santos, Jakov Vuković, Jane Idavain, Anda Curta, Petru Sandu, Matej Vinko, Maria João Forjaz","doi":"10.1093/eurpub/ckae072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>During the first epidemic wave, COVID-19 surveillance focused on quantifying the magnitude and the escalation of a growing global health crisis. The scientific community first assessed risk through basic indicators, such as the number of cases or rates of new cases and deaths, and later began using other direct impact indicators to conduct more detailed analyses. We aimed at synthesizing the scientific community's contribution to assessing the direct impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on population health through indicators reported in research papers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a rapid scoping review to identify and describe health indicators included in articles published between January 2020 and June 2021, using one strategy to search PubMed, EMBASE and WHO COVID-19 databases. Sixteen experts from European public health institutions screened papers and retrieved indicator characteristics. We also asked in an online survey how the health indicators were added to and used in policy documents in Europe.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After reviewing 3891 records, we selected a final sample of 67 articles and 233 indicators. We identified 52 (22.3%) morbidity indicators from 33 articles, 105 severity indicators (45.1%, 27 articles) and 68 mortality indicators (29.2%, 51). Respondents from 22 countries completed 31 questionnaires, and the majority reported morbidity indicators (29, 93.5%), followed by mortality indicators (26, 83.9%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The indicators collated here might be useful to assess the impact of future pandemics. Therefore, their measurement should be standardized to allow for comparisons between settings, countries and different populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":12059,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Public Health","volume":"34 Supplement_1","pages":"i3-i10"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11215319/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identification of methodological issues regarding direct impact indicators of COVID-19: a rapid scoping review on morbidity, severity and mortality.\",\"authors\":\"Cesar Garriga, Teresa Valero-Gaspar, Carmen Rodriguez-Blazquez, Asuncion Diaz, Péter Bezzegh, Šárka Daňková, Brigid Unim, Luigi Palmieri, Martin Thiβen, Richard Pentz, Šeila Cilović-Lagarija, Anes Jogunčić, Rodrigo Feteira-Santos, Jakov Vuković, Jane Idavain, Anda Curta, Petru Sandu, Matej Vinko, Maria João Forjaz\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/eurpub/ckae072\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>During the first epidemic wave, COVID-19 surveillance focused on quantifying the magnitude and the escalation of a growing global health crisis. The scientific community first assessed risk through basic indicators, such as the number of cases or rates of new cases and deaths, and later began using other direct impact indicators to conduct more detailed analyses. We aimed at synthesizing the scientific community's contribution to assessing the direct impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on population health through indicators reported in research papers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a rapid scoping review to identify and describe health indicators included in articles published between January 2020 and June 2021, using one strategy to search PubMed, EMBASE and WHO COVID-19 databases. Sixteen experts from European public health institutions screened papers and retrieved indicator characteristics. We also asked in an online survey how the health indicators were added to and used in policy documents in Europe.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After reviewing 3891 records, we selected a final sample of 67 articles and 233 indicators. We identified 52 (22.3%) morbidity indicators from 33 articles, 105 severity indicators (45.1%, 27 articles) and 68 mortality indicators (29.2%, 51). Respondents from 22 countries completed 31 questionnaires, and the majority reported morbidity indicators (29, 93.5%), followed by mortality indicators (26, 83.9%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The indicators collated here might be useful to assess the impact of future pandemics. Therefore, their measurement should be standardized to allow for comparisons between settings, countries and different populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12059,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Public Health\",\"volume\":\"34 Supplement_1\",\"pages\":\"i3-i10\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11215319/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckae072\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckae072","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在第一波疫情中,COVID-19 监测的重点是量化日益严重的全球健康危机的规模和升级情况。科学界最初通过病例数或新病例和死亡率等基本指标来评估风险,后来开始使用其他直接影响指标来进行更详细的分析。我们旨在通过研究论文中报告的指标,综合科学界在评估 COVID-19 大流行对人口健康的直接影响方面所做的贡献:我们采用一种策略检索了 PubMed、EMBASE 和世界卫生组织 COVID-19 数据库,对 2020 年 1 月至 2021 年 6 月间发表的文章中包含的健康指标进行了快速范围界定和描述。来自欧洲公共卫生机构的 16 位专家对论文进行了筛选,并检索了指标特征。我们还通过在线调查询问了欧洲的政策文件是如何添加和使用健康指标的:在查阅了 3891 条记录后,我们最终选择了 67 篇文章和 233 个指标作为样本。我们从 33 篇文章中确定了 52 个发病率指标(22.3%)、105 个严重程度指标(45.1%,27 篇文章)和 68 个死亡率指标(29.2%,51 篇文章)。来自 22 个国家的受访者填写了 31 份调查问卷,其中大多数报告了发病率指标(29 份,93.5%),其次是死亡率指标(26 份,83.9%):结论:本文整理的指标可能有助于评估未来流行病的影响。因此,这些指标的测量应该标准化,以便在不同环境、国家和不同人群之间进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Identification of methodological issues regarding direct impact indicators of COVID-19: a rapid scoping review on morbidity, severity and mortality.

Background: During the first epidemic wave, COVID-19 surveillance focused on quantifying the magnitude and the escalation of a growing global health crisis. The scientific community first assessed risk through basic indicators, such as the number of cases or rates of new cases and deaths, and later began using other direct impact indicators to conduct more detailed analyses. We aimed at synthesizing the scientific community's contribution to assessing the direct impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on population health through indicators reported in research papers.

Methods: We conducted a rapid scoping review to identify and describe health indicators included in articles published between January 2020 and June 2021, using one strategy to search PubMed, EMBASE and WHO COVID-19 databases. Sixteen experts from European public health institutions screened papers and retrieved indicator characteristics. We also asked in an online survey how the health indicators were added to and used in policy documents in Europe.

Results: After reviewing 3891 records, we selected a final sample of 67 articles and 233 indicators. We identified 52 (22.3%) morbidity indicators from 33 articles, 105 severity indicators (45.1%, 27 articles) and 68 mortality indicators (29.2%, 51). Respondents from 22 countries completed 31 questionnaires, and the majority reported morbidity indicators (29, 93.5%), followed by mortality indicators (26, 83.9%).

Conclusions: The indicators collated here might be useful to assess the impact of future pandemics. Therefore, their measurement should be standardized to allow for comparisons between settings, countries and different populations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Public Health
European Journal of Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
2.30%
发文量
2039
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Public Health (EJPH) is a multidisciplinary journal aimed at attracting contributions from epidemiology, health services research, health economics, social sciences, management sciences, ethics and law, environmental health sciences, and other disciplines of relevance to public health. The journal provides a forum for discussion and debate of current international public health issues, with a focus on the European Region. Bi-monthly issues contain peer-reviewed original articles, editorials, commentaries, book reviews, news, letters to the editor, announcements of events, and various other features.
期刊最新文献
Access points to different levels of health care over 13 years. Utilization behaviour in a changing health care system. Results of a three-wave cross-sectional series in Austria. Causal association of physical activity with lymphoma risk: a Mendelian randomization analysis. Public health approaches to 'Leave No One Behind' in heatwave resilience: insights from the UK. Intermarriage and mortality among Finnish migrants in Sweden: a prospective register study using binational data. Lessons learned from Taiwan's response to the COVID-19 pandemic: successes, challenges, and implications for future pandemics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1