A set of training materials for professionals working in intervention epidemiology, public health microbiology and infection control and hospital hygiene.
Need help with your investigation or report writing? Ask the Expert. Free advice from the professional community.
You can't make decissions on this page's approval status because you have not the owner or an admin on this page's Group.
Surveillance is not the only process that can provide information to inform public health action. The results of research can also inform public health action. Sometimes the distinction between surveillance, particularly surveillance of (or for) emerging infections, and research can be difficult to define. This can have important implications, particularly where different ethical, legal (usually data protection) and funding rules apply to research compared to surveillance. As a general rule, the key distinction is that surveillance should always be justified by, and seen as an integral component of, ongoing established prevention and control programmes.
There are a number of other dimensions on which research and surveillance can be compared, as outlined table 1. Although the distinction between research and surveillance is not always clear-cut for some of the criteria proposed in the table, and sometimes research or surveillance will not fit with all of the criteria suggested, this provides a framework for assessing whether a problem should be addressed through surveillance or research.
Creates new knowledge (about what works and what doesn't)
May contribute to knowledge (understanding) but is primarily about measuring what is already known
Is based on a hypothesis
Not usually based on a specific hypothesis (other than that the frequency or distribution of that which is the subject of surveillance may change)
May involve experiments, new interventions or purposive allocation of subjects to different interventions
Never involves experiments or purposive allocation of subjects to different interventions
Is based on a scientifically valid sample size (although this may not apply to pilot studies)
Rarely based on a scientifically defined sample size
Extensive statistical analysis of data is routine
Statistical analysis usually limited to simple measures of trend or distribution
Results are generalisable and hence publishable
Results may be generalisable
Responsibility to act on findings is not necessarily clear
Responsibility to act should always be clear
Findings may result in the application of new clinical or public health practice
Findings may result in application of established clinical or public health practice
You need to be logged in to post comments.
You can log in here. You can register here if you haven't done so yet.