Public reporting guidelines for outbreak data: Enabling accountability for effective outbreak response by developing standards for transparency and uniformity

OBJECTIVES: There are few standards for what information about an infectious disease outbreak should be reported to the public and when. To address this problem, we undertook a consensus process to develop recommendations for what epidemiological information public health authorities should report to the public during an outbreak. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a Delphi study following the steps outlined in the ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document (ACCORD) for health-related activities or research. METHODS: We assembled a steering committee of nine experts representing federal and state public health, academia, and international partners to develop a candidate list of reporting items. We then invited 45 experts, 35 of whom agreed to participate in a Delphi panel. Of those, 25 participated in voting in the first round, 25 in the second round, and 25 in the third round, demonstrating consistent engagement in the consensus-building process. The final stage of the Delphi process consisted of a hybrid consensus meeting to finalize the voting items. RESULTS: The Delphi process yielded nine core reporting items representing a minimum standard for public outbreak reporting: numbers of new confirmed cases, new hospital admissions, new deaths, cumulative confirmed cases, cumulative hospital admissions, and cumulative deaths, each reported weekly and at Administrative Level 1 (typically state or province), and stratified by sex, age group, and race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: This minimum reporting standard creates a strong framework for uniform sharing of outbreak information and promotes consistency of data between jurisdictions, enabling effective response by promoting access to information about an unfolding epidemic.