PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: The implementation of digital disease surveillance systems at national levels in Africa have been challenged by many factors. These include user applicability, utility of IT features but also stable financial support. Funding closely intertwines with implementations in terms of geographical reach, disease focus, and sustainability. However, the practice of evidence sharing on geographical and disease coverage, costs, and funding sources for improving the implementation of these systems on the continent is unclear.
OBJECTIVE: To analyse the key characteristics and availability of evidence for implementing digital infectious disease surveillance systems in Africa namely their disease focus, geographical reach, cost reporting, and external funding support.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature for the period 2003 to 2022 (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022300849). We searched five databases (PubMed, MEDLINE over Ovid, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) and websites of WHO, Africa CDC, and public health institutes of African countries. We mapped the distribution of projects by country; identified reported implementation cost components; categorised the availability of data on cost components; and identified supporting funding institutions outside Africa.
RESULTS: A total of 29 reports from 2,033 search results were eligible for analysis. We identified 27 projects implemented in 13 countries, across 32 sites. Of these, 24 (75%) were pilot projects with a median duration of 16 months, (IQR: 5-40). Of the 27 projects, 5 (19%) were implemented for HIV/AIDs and tuberculosis, 4 (15%) for malaria, 4 (15%) for all notifiable diseases, and 4 (15%) for One Health. We identified 17 cost components across the 29 reports. Of these, 11 (38%) reported quantified costs for start-up capital, 10 (34%) for health personnel compensation, 9 (31%) for training and capacity building, 8 (28%) for software maintenance, and 7(24%) for surveillance data transmission. Of 65 counts of external funding sources, 35 (54%) were governmental agencies, 15 (23%) foundations, and 7 (11%) UN agencies.
CONCLUSIONS: The evidence on costing data for the digitalisation of surveillance and outbreak response in the published literature is sparse in quantity, limited in detail, and without a standardised reporting format. Most initial direct project costs are substantially donor dependent, short lived, and thus unsustainable.
OBJECTIVE: To analyse the key characteristics and availability of evidence for implementing digital infectious disease surveillance systems in Africa namely their disease focus, geographical reach, cost reporting, and external funding support.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature for the period 2003 to 2022 (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022300849). We searched five databases (PubMed, MEDLINE over Ovid, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) and websites of WHO, Africa CDC, and public health institutes of African countries. We mapped the distribution of projects by country; identified reported implementation cost components; categorised the availability of data on cost components; and identified supporting funding institutions outside Africa.
RESULTS: A total of 29 reports from 2,033 search results were eligible for analysis. We identified 27 projects implemented in 13 countries, across 32 sites. Of these, 24 (75%) were pilot projects with a median duration of 16 months, (IQR: 5-40). Of the 27 projects, 5 (19%) were implemented for HIV/AIDs and tuberculosis, 4 (15%) for malaria, 4 (15%) for all notifiable diseases, and 4 (15%) for One Health. We identified 17 cost components across the 29 reports. Of these, 11 (38%) reported quantified costs for start-up capital, 10 (34%) for health personnel compensation, 9 (31%) for training and capacity building, 8 (28%) for software maintenance, and 7(24%) for surveillance data transmission. Of 65 counts of external funding sources, 35 (54%) were governmental agencies, 15 (23%) foundations, and 7 (11%) UN agencies.
CONCLUSIONS: The evidence on costing data for the digitalisation of surveillance and outbreak response in the published literature is sparse in quantity, limited in detail, and without a standardised reporting format. Most initial direct project costs are substantially donor dependent, short lived, and thus unsustainable.
摘要：
背景：在非洲国家一级实施数字疾病监测系统受到许多因素的挑战。这些包括用户适用性，IT功能的实用性以及稳定的财务支持。就地理范围而言，资金与实施紧密交织在一起，疾病焦点,和可持续性。然而,关于地理和疾病覆盖率的证据共享的做法，成本,改善这些系统在非洲大陆的实施的资金来源尚不清楚。
目的：分析在非洲实施数字传染病监测系统的关键特征和证据的可用性，即其疾病重点，地理范围,成本报告，外部资金支持。
方法：我们对2003年至2022年的同行评审和灰色文献进行了系统评价（PROSPERO注册号：CRD42022300849）。我们搜索了五个数据库(PubMed，在奥维德之上的MEDLINE,EMBASE,WebofScience,和谷歌学者)和世界卫生组织的网站，非洲CDC,和非洲国家的公共卫生机构。我们按国家绘制了项目分布图；确定了报告的实施成本组成部分；对成本组成部分的数据可用性进行了分类；并确定了非洲以外的支持供资机构。
结果：从2,033个搜索结果中，共有29个报告符合分析条件。我们确定了在13个国家实施的27个项目，32个网站其中,24个(75%)是试点项目，中位持续时间为16个月，（IQR：5-40）。在27个项目中，5例（19%）用于艾滋病毒/艾滋病和结核病，4（15%）为疟疾，4（15％）对于所有应报告的疾病，一种健康为4（15%）。我们在29份报告中确定了17个成本组成部分。其中,11人(38%)报告了启动资金的量化成本，10（34%）用于卫生人员补偿，9（31%）用于培训和能力建设，8（28%）用于软件维护，和7（24％）用于监视数据传输。在65个外部资金来源中，35个（54%）是政府机构，15个（23%）基础，7个（11%）联合国机构。
结论：已发表文献中关于监测和疫情应对数字化的成本计算数据的证据数量很少，有限的细节，没有标准化的报告格式。大多数最初的直接项目成本在很大程度上取决于捐助者，短暂的,因此不可持续。
目的：分析在非洲实施数字传染病监测系统的关键特征和证据的可用性，即其疾病重点，地理范围,成本报告，外部资金支持。
方法：我们对2003年至2022年的同行评审和灰色文献进行了系统评价（PROSPERO注册号：CRD42022300849）。我们搜索了五个数据库(PubMed，在奥维德之上的MEDLINE,EMBASE,WebofScience,和谷歌学者)和世界卫生组织的网站，非洲CDC,和非洲国家的公共卫生机构。我们按国家绘制了项目分布图；确定了报告的实施成本组成部分；对成本组成部分的数据可用性进行了分类；并确定了非洲以外的支持供资机构。
结果：从2,033个搜索结果中，共有29个报告符合分析条件。我们确定了在13个国家实施的27个项目，32个网站其中,24个(75%)是试点项目，中位持续时间为16个月，（IQR：5-40）。在27个项目中，5例（19%）用于艾滋病毒/艾滋病和结核病，4（15%）为疟疾，4（15％）对于所有应报告的疾病，一种健康为4（15%）。我们在29份报告中确定了17个成本组成部分。其中,11人(38%)报告了启动资金的量化成本，10（34%）用于卫生人员补偿，9（31%）用于培训和能力建设，8（28%）用于软件维护，和7（24％）用于监视数据传输。在65个外部资金来源中，35个（54%）是政府机构，15个（23%）基础，7个（11%）联合国机构。
结论：已发表文献中关于监测和疫情应对数字化的成本计算数据的证据数量很少，有限的细节，没有标准化的报告格式。大多数最初的直接项目成本在很大程度上取决于捐助者，短暂的,因此不可持续。
