Scoping review uncovers challenges and opportunities in digital surveillance for rubella, suggesting new pathways for public health.
Background: The global fight against rubella and congenital rubella syndrome necessitates effective public health surveillance systems. Digital transformation in rubella surveillance has emerged as a pivotal solution to overcome challenges associated with traditional paper-based reporting methods, including inefficiencies in data collection, delays, and inaccuracies. This scoping review examines global practices, challenges, and opportunities in digital rubella surveillance. Method: A scoping review methodology was employed, guided by the Arksey and O'Malley framework and enhancements from the Joanna Briggs Institute. A systematic search was conducted across databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and the WHO Global Health Library, covering literature from 2010 to 2024. Eighteen studies meeting the inclusion criteria, focusing on digital surveillance tools and practices in rubella monitoring, were synthesised. Data were extracted and analysed thematically to identify common practices, challenges, and opportunities. Results: The most prominent theme was implementation challenges (50%), particularly data completeness, infrastructure limitations, privacy concerns, and training gaps. Surveillance effectiveness (38.9%) focused on diagnostic accuracy and reporting timeliness. Global practices (33.3%) highlighted mobile apps, EMRs, GIS, and DHIS2 use, with varied adoption across income settings. Opportunities (16.7%) included AI integration, age-structured data strategies, and cross-border collaborations to enhance CRS prevention and surveillance system performance. Conclusion: Digital transformation holds transformative potential for rubella surveillance, offering scalable and cost-effective solutions to address existing gaps. Policymakers and stakeholders must prioritise investments in digital infrastructure, training, and regulatory frameworks to optimise these systems and support rubella elimination goals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Akanbi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: