Framework demonstrates improved data interpretation in infectious disease surveillance, implying better situational assessment.
In infectious disease surveillance, laboratory-confirmed case counts and test positivity (proportion of tests positive for the target pathogen) are commonly used to monitor disease activity. However, these test-based data are affected not only by disease incidence but also by testing intensity, often making interpretations difficult. To help address this challenge, we present a generalizable, systematic framework that considers the number of tests performed, number of test-positive counts, and test positivity. With explicit consideration of ascertainment bias, we explain why all 3 indicators should be used to improve data interpretation, situational assessment, and communication.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arima et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: