Direct cost associated with the development and implementation of a local syndromic surveillance system

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 194-199

  Kirkwood, Amy ^a   Guenther, Eric ^b   Fleischauer, Aaron T ^b   Gunn, Julia ^a   Hutwagner, Lori ^b   Barry, M Anita ^a  

^a Boston Public Health Commissions   (United States)

^b NATL CENTER FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASES   (United States)

Author keywords

Cost; Syndromic surveillance; Systems analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEVELOPMENT; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; EMERGENCY WARD; GOVERNMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYNDROMIC SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33847050845     PISSN: 10784659     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00124784-200703000-00017     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. United States Department of Health and Human Services. HHS announces $1.1 billion in funding to states for bioterrorism preparedness. Press release January 31, 2002. Available at: http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2002pres/ 20020131b.html. Accessed April 17, 2006.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Continuation guidance for cooperative agreement on public health preparedness and response for bioterrorism - budget year five. Available at: http://www.bt.cdc.gov/planning/ continuationguidance/. Accessed May 11, 2006.
3. Sosin DM. Syndromic surveillance: the case for skillful investment. Biosecur Bioterrorism Biodefense Strat Pract Sci. 2003;1:247-253.
4. Buehler JW, Berkelman RL, Hartley DM, Peters CJ. Syndromic surveillance and bioterrorism-related epidemics. Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9(10):1197-1204.
5. Heffernan R, Mostashari F, Das D, Karpati A, Kulldorff M, Weiss D. Syndromic surveillance in public health practice, New York City. Emerg Infect Dis. 2004;10(5):858-864.
6. Heffernan R, Mostashari F, Besculides M, et al.NewYork City syndromic surveillance systems. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004;53(suppl):25-27.
7. Doroshenko A, Cooper D, Smith G, et al. Evaluation of syndromic surveillance based national health service direct derived data - England and Wales. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2005;54(suppl):117-122.
8. Buehler JW, Hopkins RS, Overhage JM, Sosin DM, Tong V. Framework for evaluating public health surveillance systems for early detection of outbreaks: recommendations from the CDC working group. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004;53(RR-5):1-13.
9. United States Secret Service. National Special Security Events. Available at: http://www.secretservice.gov/nsse.shtml. Accessed May 11, 2006.
10. Hutwagner L, Browne T, Seeman GM, Fleischauer AT. Comparing aberration detection methods with simulated data. Emerg Infect Dis. 2005;11:314-316.
11. World Health Organization. Evaluating the costs and benefits of national surveillance and response systems: methodologies and options. Available at: http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/surveillance/ WHO_CDS_EPR_LYO_2005_25/en/. Accessed May 9, 2006.
12. Reingold A. If syndromic surveillance is the answer, what is the question? Biosecur Bioterrorism Biodefense Strat Pract Sci. 2003;1(2):77-81.