Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 May 19:25:e44649.
doi: 10.2196/44649.

Effectiveness of Public Health Digital Surveillance Systems for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control at Mass Gatherings: Systematic Review

Affiliations

Effectiveness of Public Health Digital Surveillance Systems for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control at Mass Gatherings: Systematic Review

Noha Maddah et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Mass gatherings (MGs; eg, religious, sporting, musical, sociocultural, and other occasions that draw large crowds) pose public health challenges and concerns related to global health. A leading global concern regarding MGs is the possible importation and exportation of infectious diseases as they spread from the attendees to the general population, resulting in epidemic outbreaks. Governments and health authorities use technological interventions to support public health surveillance and prevent and control infectious diseases.

Objective: This study aims to review the evidence on the effectiveness of public health digital surveillance systems for infectious disease prevention and control at MG events.

Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in January 2022 using the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus databases to examine relevant articles published in English up to January 2022. Interventional studies describing or evaluating the effectiveness of public health digital surveillance systems for infectious disease prevention and control at MGs were included in the analysis. Owing to the lack of appraisal tools for interventional studies describing and evaluating public health digital surveillance systems at MGs, a critical appraisal tool was developed and used to assess the quality of the included studies.

Results: In total, 8 articles were included in the review, and 3 types of MGs were identified: religious (the Hajj and Prayagraj Kumbh), sporting (the Olympic and Paralympic Games, the Federation International Football Association World Cup, and the Micronesian Games), and cultural (the Festival of Pacific Arts) events. In total, 88% (7/8) of the studies described surveillance systems implemented at MG events, and 12% (1/8) of the studies described and evaluated an enhanced surveillance system that was implemented for an event. In total, 4 studies reported the implementation of a surveillance system: 2 (50%) described the enhancement of the system that was implemented for an event, 1 (25%) reported a pilot implementation of a surveillance system, and 1 (25%) reported an evaluation of an enhanced system. The types of systems investigated were 2 syndromic, 1 participatory, 1 syndromic and event-based, 1 indicator- and event-based, and 1 event-based surveillance system. In total, 62% (5/8) of the studies reported timeliness as an outcome generated after implementing or enhancing the system without measuring its effectiveness. Only 12% (1/8) of the studies followed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance systems and the outcomes of enhanced systems based on the systems' attributes to measure their effectiveness.

Conclusions: On the basis of the review of the literature and the analysis of the included studies, there is limited evidence of the effectiveness of public health digital surveillance systems for infectious disease prevention and control at MGs because of the absence of evaluation studies.

Keywords: digital surveillance system; infectious disease prevention and control; mass gathering event; public health; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of the selection process for the included studies. MG: mass gathering.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Morse SS. Public health surveillance and infectious disease detection. Biosecur Bioterror. 2012 Mar;10(1):6–16. doi: 10.1089/bsp.2011.0088. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Choi J, Cho Y, Shim E, Woo H. Web-based infectious disease surveillance systems and public health perspectives: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2016 Dec 08;16(1):1238. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3893-0. https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-016-38... 10.1186/s12889-016-3893-0 - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Abat C, Chaudet H, Rolain JM, Colson P, Raoult D. Traditional and syndromic surveillance of infectious diseases and pathogens. Int J Infect Dis. 2016 Jul;48:22–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2016.04.021. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1201-9712(16)31038-4 S1201-9712(16)31038-4 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Morens DM, Folkers GK, Fauci AS. The challenge of emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases. Nature. 2004 Jul 08;430(6996):242–9. doi: 10.1038/nature02759. https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/15241422 nature02759 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Karami M, Doosti-Irani A, Ardalan A, Gohari-Ensaf F, Berangi Z, Massad E, Rebi Yeganeh M, Asadi-Lari M, Gouya MM. Public health threats in mass gatherings: a systematic review. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2019 Dec;13(5-6):1035–46. doi: 10.1017/dmp.2018.161.S1935789318001611 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms