So I recognize that the concept of participatory surveillance might seem novel and potentially scary. But actually there is a rich history.
Historically, it was used in the eradication of smallpox and rinderpest. The approach has been modernized with new technology.
(1/8)
Historically, it was used in the eradication of smallpox and rinderpest. The approach has been modernized with new technology.
(1/8)
Participatory disease surveillance collects data for public health action by directly involving the population at risk in submitting relevant data through survey tools. This is especially relevant when testing is lacking and we have no means to measure risk (#covid19)
(2/8)
(2/8)
It also helps get access to information quicker than through traditional channels of public health surveillance. (3/8) 
Extensive work has been done by colleagues around the world – see the incredible work of @flutrack @Influenzanet @FluSurveyIE @fluoutlook – some pioneers include @CraigBDalton @danielapaolotti @ciro @majohanss @alexvespi @rumichunara @adamwcrawley (4/8)
After running @FluNearYou for the past 9 years, we found:
1-early and accurate insights into flu epidemics (start, peak, demographic)
2-quantify the impact of interventions (vaccines, social distancing)
3- identify geographies at risk
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25835538 (5/8)
1-early and accurate insights into flu epidemics (start, peak, demographic)
2-quantify the impact of interventions (vaccines, social distancing)
3- identify geographies at risk
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25835538 (5/8)
We have not seen misunderstanding of the data and concept by users. In fact, we’ve seen that broad engagement in these tools has created more informed and more proactive population (ie improved vaccination rates).
The public is smarter than given credit for. (6/8)
The public is smarter than given credit for. (6/8)
Of course privacy concerns need to be accounted for. And this has been discussed widely. Good paper by the amazing @EffyVayena along with @salathe @lmadoff (two other pioneers in digital epidemiology) (7/8)
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25664461
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25664461
But let’s also recognize we are trying to make the public a direct recipient of data rather than just a data feed as what is classically done in public health.
So yes lots to consider but let’s not automatically discount “putting the public back in public health”
(8/8)
So yes lots to consider but let’s not automatically discount “putting the public back in public health”
(8/8)
actually meant @marcelsalathe
