Data Verification, Secured Correspondence Systems, and Other Issues of Inter-jurisdictional Data Sharing

1. Data Verification, Secured Correspondence Systems, and Other Issues of Inter-jurisdictional Data Sharing Lyle R. Petersen, M.D., M.P.H.

2. Two Objectives of National Surveillance Requiring Interjurisdictional Data Sharing Further develop national public health strategies for WN virus surveillance, prevention, and control. Provide national and regional information to public health officials, elected government officials, and the public.

3. Data Security Issues State and local authorities control timing of data release Via secure web site, early access to data to ensure that data released by CDC are correct Protect confidentiality: Personal identifiers not collected for surveillance purposes Localizing information more specific than county not released by CDC Freedom of Information Act: can protect individuals but not institutions

4. Data Flow and Timing, 2000

5. Observations Public release of numerator data by states very rapid No premature release of information by CDC High degree of accuracy Newsworthy surveillance events: New counties (mosquitoes, mammals, birds, horses) Any human case

6. Need for Improvement Phone-in reporting to CDC became overwhelmed (esp. for dead birds) Verification slow and cumbersome, particularly for high frequency events Too many data points to be verified �OK to publish� check-off redundant Too many data fields in numerator National data in National Atlas � minimum 7 days old (good for examining trends, too slow to react to media)

7. Need to Better Define Avian Morbidity/Mortality Denominator Data Collection

8. Recommendations: Data Collection and Release (Numerator) Limit number of forwarded data fields Automate reporting Birds and mosquitoes Eliminate verification step Eliminate �OK to publish� designation Data returned to states within 24 hours of receipt Data considered verified and ready for release within 48 hours of receipt unless CDC informed otherwise Horses, other mammals, persons Same procedure as in 2000 Eliminate �OK to publish� designation

9. Recommended Avian Morbidity/Mortality Denominator Data Collection

10. Recommendations: Data Collection and Release (Denominator) Eliminate verification step Eliminate �OK to publish� designation Consider transferring data from birds and mosquitoes that test negative so the proportion positive by week of collection can be computed Better definition of what to report; more training and oversight

11. Recommendations: Data Collection and Release Jurisdictions must identify an IT point person responsible for electronic transfer and receipt of information

12. Interjurisdictional Communication Wednesday conference calls (great) Web board (total failure) Notification by CDC of significant events (mixed) Notification by states of significant events (mixed) MMWR (good) National Atlas (good for examining trends, needs to be supplemented by other systems for very timely events)

13. Recommendations: Communication Interjurisdictional communication Continue weekly phone calls as necessary Epi-X MMWR Summary on CDC web site National Atlas Communication to public Primarily a state and local health dept. responsibility MMWR National Atlas Summary on CDC web site with links to state sites for more detailed information