Identification and evaluation of epidemic prediction and forecasting reporting guidelines: A systematic review and a call for action.
Identification and evaluation of epidemic prediction and forecasting reporting guidelines: A systematic review and a call for action.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.epidem.2020.100400
复制
发表时间：
2020-12
期刊：
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Rivers C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pollett S;Johansson M;Biggerstaff M;Morton LC;Bazaco SL;Brett Major DM;Stewart-Ibarra AM;Pavlin JA;Mate S;Sippy R;Hartman LJ;Reich NG;Maljkovic Berry I;Chretien JP;Althouse BM;Myer D;Viboud C;Rivers C
高质量的流行病预报和预测对于支持应对地方、区域和全球传染病威胁至关重要。生物医学研究的其他领域使用共识报告准则来确保研究人员研究实践的标准化和质量，并为最终用户解释研究结果的有效性提供一个框架。本研究的目的是确定是否存在专门用于流行病预测和预测出版物的指南。我们进行了正式的系统审查，以确定和评估任何已发表的传染病流行预测和预测报告指南。这项审查调动了来自美国政府和学术部门的18名调查人员。截至2019年5月26日的文献数据库检索，确定了1467篇出版物（MEDLINE n = 584, EMBASE n = 883），灰色文献综述确定了另外407篇出版物，共产生1777篇独特的出版物。配对审稿人系统筛选了25份可能符合条件的出版物，其中两份最终被认为符合条件。对这两份已发表的报告准则进行的定性审查表明，尽管它们描述了可能与流行病预测和预测研究有关的报告项目，但它们都不是专门针对流行病预测和预测的。这一系统审查证实，没有发表具体的指南来规范流行病预测和预测研究的报告。这些调查结果突出表明，有必要制定这种报告准则，以提高公共卫生业务方面流行病预测和预测研究的透明度、质量和执行情况。
High quality epidemic forecasting and prediction are critical to support response to local, regional and global infectious disease threats. Other fields of biomedical research use consensus reporting guidelines to ensure standardization and quality of research practice among researchers, and to provide a framework for end-users to interpret the validity of study results. The purpose of this study was to determine whether guidelines exist specifically for epidemic forecast and prediction publications. We undertook a formal systematic review to identify and evaluate any published infectious disease epidemic forecasting and prediction reporting guidelines. This review leveraged a team of 18 investigators from US Government and academic sectors. A literature database search through May 26, 2019, identified 1467 publications (MEDLINE n = 584, EMBASE n = 883), and a grey-literature review identified a further 407 publications, yielding a total 1777 unique publications. A paired-reviewer system screened in 25 potentially eligible publications, of which two were ultimately deemed eligible. A qualitative review of these two published reporting guidelines indicated that neither were specific for epidemic forecasting and prediction, although they described reporting items which may be relevant to epidemic forecasting and prediction studies. This systematic review confirms that no specific guidelines have been published to standardize the reporting of epidemic forecasting and prediction studies. These findings underscore the need to develop such reporting guidelines in order to improve the transparency, quality and implementation of epidemic forecasting and prediction research in operational public health.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
6.4
作者：
Keegan, Lindsay T.;Lessler, Justin;Johansson, Michael A.
通讯作者：
Johansson, Michael A.
影响因子：
28.3
作者：
Perkins, T. Alex;Siraj, Amir S.;Tatem, Andrew J.
通讯作者：
Tatem, Andrew J.
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Debellut F;Hendrix N;Ortiz JR;Lambach P;Neuzil KM;Bhat N;Pecenka C
通讯作者：
Pecenka C
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.1714457115
发表时间：
2018-03-06
影响因子：
11.1
作者：
Lauer SA;Sakrejda K;Ray EL;Keegan LT;Bi Q;Suangtho P;Hinjoy S;Iamsirithaworn S;Suthachana S;Laosiritaworn Y;Cummings DAT;Lessler J;Reich NG
通讯作者：
Reich NG
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Nsoesie EO;Brownstein JS;Ramakrishnan N;Marathe MV
通讯作者：
Marathe MV