Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Evaluation of animal and public health surveillance systems: a systematic review

  • J. A. DREWE (a1), L. J. HOINVILLE (a2), A. J. C. COOK (a3), T. FLOYD (a2) and K. D. C. STÄRK (a1)...

Disease surveillance programmes ought to be evaluated regularly to ensure they provide valuable information in an efficient manner. Evaluation of human and animal health surveillance programmes around the world is currently not standardized and therefore inconsistent. The aim of this systematic review was to review surveillance system attributes and the methods used for their assessment, together with the strengths and weaknesses of existing frameworks for evaluating surveillance in animal health, public health and allied disciplines. Information from 99 articles describing the evaluation of 101 surveillance systems was examined. A wide range of approaches for assessing 23 different system attributes was identified although most evaluations addressed only one or two attributes and comprehensive evaluations were uncommon. Surveillance objectives were often not stated in the articles reviewed and so the reasons for choosing certain attributes for assessment were not always apparent. This has the potential to introduce misleading results in surveillance evaluation. Due to the wide range of system attributes that may be assessed, methods should be explored which collapse these down into a small number of grouped characteristics by focusing on the relationships between attributes and their links to the objectives of the surveillance system and the evaluation. A generic and comprehensive evaluation framework could then be developed consisting of a limited number of common attributes together with several sets of secondary attributes which could be selected depending on the disease or range of diseases under surveillance and the purpose of the surveillance. Economic evaluation should be an integral part of the surveillance evaluation process. This would provide a significant benefit to decision-makers who often need to make choices based on limited or diminishing resources.

Corresponding author
*Author for correspondence: Dr J. A. Drewe, Centre for Emerging, Endemic and Exotic Diseases, Royal Veterinary College, Hawkshead Lane, North Mymms, Herts, AL9 7TA, UK. (Email:
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

2.KDC Stärk , Concepts for risk-based surveillance in the field of veterinary medicine and veterinary public health: Review of current approaches. BMC Health Services Research 2006; 6: 18.

5.DM Bravata , Systematic review: surveillance systems for early detection of bioterrorism-related diseases. Annals of Internal Medicine 2004; 140: 910922.

7.JB Meynard , Proposal of a framework for evaluating military surveillance systems for early detection of outbreaks on duty areas. BMC Public Health 2008; 8: 146.

8.TJD Knight-Jones , Evaluation of effectiveness and efficiency of wild bird surveillance for avian influenza. Veterinary Research 2010; 41: 50.

12.CPD Birch , Spatial distribution of the active surveillance of sheep scrapie in Great Britain: an exploratory analysis. BMC Veterinary Research 2009; 5: 23.

13.TE Carpenter . Evaluation and extension of the cusum technique with an application to Salmonella surveillance. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation 2002; 14: 211218.

21.P Aavitsland , O Nilsen , A Lystad . Anonymous reporting of HIV infection: an evaluation of the HIV/AIDS surveillance system in Norway 1983–2000. European Journal of Epidemiology 2001; 17: 479489.

23.HJ Andersen , Evaluation of the surveillance program of Streptococcus agalactiae in Danish dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 2003; 86: 12331239.

27.JA Ansari , Evaluation of the existing bacterial meningitis surveillance system in Islamabad, Pakistan. International Journal of Infectious Diseases 2008; 12: E192.

28.S Arscott-Mills , Y Holder , G Gordon . Comparative evaluation of different modes of a national accident and emergency department-based injury surveillance system: Jamaican experience. International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion 2002; 9: 235239.

31.JA Betancourt , Evaluation of ICD-9 codes for syndromic surveillance in the electronic surveillance system for the early notification of community-based epidemics. Military Medicine 2007; 172: 346352.

32.AF Betanzos-Reyes , Comparative analysis of two alternative models for epidemiological surveillance in the Mexican Malaria Control Program. Health Policy 2007; 80: 465482.

34.HJ Bowen , Community exposures to chemical incidents: development and evaluation of the first environmental public health surveillance system in Europe. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2000; 54: 870873.

35.S Brooker , The use of schools for malaria surveillance and programme evaluation in Africa. Malaria Journal 2009; 8: 231.

38.TE Carpenter , M Chriel , M Greiner . An analysis of an early-warning system to reduce abortions in dairy cattle in Denmark incorporating both financial and epidemiologic aspects. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2007; 78: 111.

39.MP Carrieri , Evaluation of the SIMI system, an experimental computerised network for the surveillance of communicable diseases in Italy. European Journal of Epidemiology 2000; 16: 941947.

41.M Chriel , MD Salman , BA Wagner . Evaluation of surveillance and sample collection methods to document freedom from infectious bovine rhinotracheitis in cattle populations. American Journal of Veterinary Research 2005; 66: 21492153.

43.M Cretikos , B Telfer , J McAnulty . Evaluation of the system of surveillance for enteric disease outbreaks, New South Wales, Australia, 2000 to 2005. NSW Public Health Bulletin 2008; 19: 8–14.

44.ST David , A bird's eye view: using geographic analysis to evaluate the representativeness of corvid indicators for West Nile virus surveillance. International Journal of Health Geographics 2007; 6: 3.

53.DC Hadorn , KDC Stark . Evaluation and optimization of surveillance systems for rare and emerging infectious diseases. Veterinary Research 2008; 39: 57.

56.R Harpaz , Lessons learned from establishing and evaluating indicators of the quality of measles surveillance in the United States, 1996–1998. Journal of Infectious Diseases 2004; 189: S196S203.

60.MA Huaman , Impact of two interventions on timeliness and data quality of an electronic disease surveillance system in a resource limited setting (Peru): a prospective evaluation. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2009; 9: 16.

72.L Lesher , Evaluation of surveillance methods for staphylococcal toxic shock syndrome. Emerging Infectious Diseases 2009; 15: 770773.

74.C Macarthur , IB Pless . Evaluation of the quality of an injury surveillance system. American Journal of Epidemiology 1999; 149: 586592.

75.JC Mariner , Rinderpest surveillance performance monitoring using quantifiable indicators. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'Office International des Epizooties 2003; 22: 837847.

81.S Morris , The costs and effectiveness of surveillance of communicable disease: a case study of HIV and AIDS in England and Wales. Journal of Public Health Medicine 1996; 18: 415422.

83.A Odoi , Application of an automated surveillance-data-analysis system in a laboratory-based early-warning system for detection of an abortion outbreak in mares. American Journal of Veterinary Research 2009; 70: 247256.

88.JL Richard , B Vidondo , M Mausezahl . A 5-year comparison of performance of sentinel and mandatory notification surveillance systems for measles in Switzerland. European Journal of Epidemiology 2008; 23: 5565.

93.RM Safdar , SA Khan , RJ Asghar . Evaluation of hepatitis surveillance systems in Pakistan. International Journal of Infectious Diseases 2008; 12: E192.

94.M Sandberg , An evaluation of the Norwegian Salmonella surveillance and control program in live pig and pork. International Journal of Food Microbiology 2002; 72: 111.

95.JP Sekhobo , CM Druschel . An evaluation of congenital malformations surveillance in New York State: An application of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for evaluating surveillance systems. Public Health Reports 2001; 116: 296305.

97.HF Tan , Evaluation of the national notifiable disease surveillance system in Taiwan: An example of varicella reporting. Vaccine 2007; 25: 26302633.

99.N Walker , Epidemiological analysis of the quality of HIV sero-surveillance in the world: how well do we track the epidemic? AIDS 2001; 15: 15451554.

100.RE Watkins , An evaluation of the sensitivity of acute flaccid paralysis surveillance for poliovirus infection in Australia. BMC Infectious Diseases 2009; 9: 162.

107.KC Malecki , B Resnick , TA Burke . Effective environmental public health surveillance programs: a framework for identifying and evaluating data resources and indicators. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice 2008; 14: 543551.

108.RJ Mitchell , AM Williamson , R O'Connor . The development of an evaluation framework for injury surveillance systems. BMC Public Health 2009; 9: 260.

114.GM Jolly . Explicit estimates from capture-recapture data with both death and immigration-stochastic model. Biometrika 1965; 52: 225247.

115.VJ Del Rio Vilas , A case study of capture-recapture methodology using scrapie surveillance data in Great Britain. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2005; 67: 303317.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Epidemiology & Infection
  • ISSN: 0950-2688
  • EISSN: 1469-4409
  • URL: /core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Altmetric attention score