Towards more transparent risk assessment of communicable diseases - Redefining probability and impact.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Maarten Nauta, Lasse Engbo Christiansen, Stine Kjær Lefèvre, Charlotte Louise Munkstrup, Johanna Young, Hanne Rosenquist
{"title":"Towards more transparent risk assessment of communicable diseases - Redefining probability and impact.","authors":"Maarten Nauta, Lasse Engbo Christiansen, Stine Kjær Lefèvre, Charlotte Louise Munkstrup, Johanna Young, Hanne Rosenquist","doi":"10.1017/S0950268825000147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Epidemic preparedness requires clear procedures and guidelines when a rapid risk assessment of a communicable disease threat is requested. In an evaluation of past risk assessments, we found that modifications to existing guidelines, such as the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control's (ECDC) rapid risk assessment operational tool, can strengthen this process. Therefore, we present alternative guidelines, in which we propose a unifying risk assessment terminology, describe how the risk question should be phrased by the risk manager, and redefine the probability and impact dimension of risk, including a methodology to express uncertainty. In our approach, probability refers to the probability of the introduction of a disease into a specified population in a specified time period, and impact combines the magnitude of spread and the severity of the health outcomes. Based on the collected evidence, both the probability of introduction and the magnitude of spread are quantitatively expressed by expert judgements, providing unambiguous risk assessment. We advise not to summarize the risk by a single qualification as 'low' or 'high'. These alternative guidelines, which are illustrated by a hypothetical example on mpox, have been implemented at Statens Serum Institut in Denmark and can benefit other public health institutes.</p>","PeriodicalId":11721,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology and Infection","volume":" ","pages":"e31"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11869063/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology and Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268825000147","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Epidemic preparedness requires clear procedures and guidelines when a rapid risk assessment of a communicable disease threat is requested. In an evaluation of past risk assessments, we found that modifications to existing guidelines, such as the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control's (ECDC) rapid risk assessment operational tool, can strengthen this process. Therefore, we present alternative guidelines, in which we propose a unifying risk assessment terminology, describe how the risk question should be phrased by the risk manager, and redefine the probability and impact dimension of risk, including a methodology to express uncertainty. In our approach, probability refers to the probability of the introduction of a disease into a specified population in a specified time period, and impact combines the magnitude of spread and the severity of the health outcomes. Based on the collected evidence, both the probability of introduction and the magnitude of spread are quantitatively expressed by expert judgements, providing unambiguous risk assessment. We advise not to summarize the risk by a single qualification as 'low' or 'high'. These alternative guidelines, which are illustrated by a hypothetical example on mpox, have been implemented at Statens Serum Institut in Denmark and can benefit other public health institutes.

实现更透明的传染病风险评估——重新定义概率和影响。
当需要对传染病威胁进行快速风险评估时,流行病防范需要明确的程序和准则。在对过去风险评估的评估中,我们发现对现有指南的修改,例如欧洲疾病预防和控制中心(ECDC)的快速风险评估操作工具,可以加强这一进程。因此,我们提出了替代指南,其中我们提出了统一的风险评估术语,描述了风险管理人员应该如何表述风险问题,并重新定义了风险的概率和影响维度,包括表达不确定性的方法。在我们的方法中,概率指的是某种疾病在特定时间段内进入特定人群的概率,而影响则结合了传播的幅度和健康结果的严重程度。根据收集到的证据,专家判断定量表达了引入概率和传播程度,提供了明确的风险评估。我们建议不要用“低”或“高”来概括风险。丹麦Statens血清研究所已经实施了这些替代准则,并可使其他公共卫生机构受益,其中一个关于麻疹的假设例子说明了这些准则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Epidemiology and Infection
Epidemiology and Infection 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
2.40%
发文量
366
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiology & Infection publishes original reports and reviews on all aspects of infection in humans and animals. Particular emphasis is given to the epidemiology, prevention and control of infectious diseases. The scope covers the zoonoses, outbreaks, food hygiene, vaccine studies, statistics and the clinical, social and public-health aspects of infectious disease, as well as some tropical infections. It has become the key international periodical in which to find the latest reports on recently discovered infections and new technology. For those concerned with policy and planning for the control of infections, the papers on mathematical modelling of epidemics caused by historical, current and emergent infections are of particular value.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信