Klamer Sofieke, Van Goethem Nina, Thomas Daniel, Duysburgh Els, Braeye Toon, Quoilin Sophie
Epidemiology and public health, Epidemiology of infectious diseases, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
European Programme for Intervention Epidemiology Training (EPIET), European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), Stockholm, Sweden.
BMC Public Health. 2021 Jan 22;21(1):192. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09566-9.
National public health agencies are required to prioritise infectious diseases for prevention and control. We applied the prioritisation method recommended by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control to rank infectious diseases, according to their relative importance for surveillance and public health, to inform future public health action in Belgium.
We applied the multi-criteria-decision-analysis approach. A working group of epidemiologists and statisticians from Belgium (n = 6) designed a balanced set of prioritisation criteria. A panel of Belgian experts (n = 80) allocated in an online survey each criteria a weight, according to perceived relative importance. Next, experts (n = 37) scored each disease against each criteria in an online survey, guided by disease-specific factsheets referring the period 2010-2016 in Belgium. The weighted sum of the criteria's scores composed the final weighted score per disease, on which the ranking was based. Sensitivity analyses quantified the impact of eight alternative analysis scenarios on the top-20 ranked diseases. We identified criteria and diseases associated with data-gaps as those with the highest number of blank answers in the scoring survey. Principle components of the final weighted score were identified.
Working groups selected 98 diseases and 18 criteria, structured in five criteria groups. The diseases ranked highest were (in order) pertussis, human immunodeficiency virus infection, hepatitis C and hepatitis B. Among the five criteria groups, overall the highest weights were assigned to 'impact on the patient', followed by 'impact on public health', while different perceptions were identified between clinicians, microbiologists and epidemiologists. Among the 18 individual criteria, 'spreading potential' and 'events requiring public health action' were assigned the highest weights. Principle components clustered with thematic disease groups. Notable data gaps were found among hospital-related diseases.
We ranked infectious diseases using a standardised reproducible approach. The diseases ranked highest are included in current public health programs, but additional reflection for example about needs among risk groups is recommended. Cross-reference of the obtained ranking with current programs is needed to verify whether resources and activities map priority areas. We recommend to implement this method in a recurrent evaluation cycle of national public health priorities.
国家公共卫生机构需要对传染病的预防和控制工作进行优先排序。我们应用了欧洲疾病预防控制中心推荐的优先排序方法,根据传染病在监测和公共卫生方面的相对重要性对其进行排名,以为比利时未来的公共卫生行动提供参考。
我们采用了多标准决策分析方法。一个由比利时的流行病学家和统计学家组成的工作组(n = 6)设计了一套平衡的优先排序标准。一组比利时专家(n = 80)在一项在线调查中根据感知到的相对重要性为每个标准分配权重。接下来,专家们(n = 37)在一项在线调查中根据参考比利时2010 - 2016年期间特定疾病情况说明书,针对每个标准对每种疾病进行评分。标准分数的加权总和构成了每种疾病的最终加权分数,并据此进行排名。敏感性分析量化了八种替代分析方案对排名前20位疾病的影响。我们将与数据缺口相关的标准和疾病确定为评分调查中空白答案数量最多的那些。确定了最终加权分数的主成分。
工作组选择了98种疾病和18条标准,分为五个标准组。排名最高的疾病依次为百日咳、人类免疫缺陷病毒感染、丙型肝炎和乙型肝炎。在五个标准组中,总体而言,“对患者的影响”被赋予的权重最高,其次是“对公共卫生的影响”,同时在临床医生、微生物学家和流行病学家之间发现了不同的看法。在18条单独的标准中,“传播潜力”和“需要公共卫生行动的事件”被赋予了最高权重。主成分与主题疾病组聚类。在与医院相关的疾病中发现了明显的数据缺口。
我们使用标准化的可重复方法对传染病进行了排名。排名最高的疾病已纳入当前公共卫生项目,但建议进行额外的思考,例如关于风险群体的需求。需要将获得的排名与当前项目进行交叉参考,以验证资源和活动是否对应优先领域。我们建议在国家公共卫生优先事项的定期评估周期中实施此方法。