Table 3 List of indicators and scores [1 (< 60%): weak performance; 2 (60–79%): moderate performance; 3 (≥80%) good performance] for data quality and completeness, timeliness, representativeness and flexibility used for the evaluation of the influenza sentinel surveillance system in the Democratic Republic of Congo, 2012–2015
Indicator | Calculation/data inputs | Data source | Indicator value | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Data quality and completeness | ||||
• Proportion of SARI/ILI cases that meet the case definition | Number of ILI/SARI cases that meet the case definition / Total number of ILI/SARI cases | Case-based database | 97.4% | 3 |
• Proportion of samples from ILI/SARI cases received with accompanying CIF | Number of samples from SARI/ILI cases received with accompanying CIF / Total number of samples received from SARI/ILI cases | Laboratory log book and case-based database | 98.0% | 3 |
• Proportion of forms without at least one inconsistent or missing value for key variablesa | Number of forms without at least one abnormal or missing value / Total number of forms | Case-based database | 97.5% | 3 |
• Proportion of good quality samples received | Number of good quality samples received / Total number of samples received | Case-based database | 97.0% | 3 |
• Proportion of sample with positive RNP results | Number of samples with a positive RNP result / Total number of samples tested | Case-based database | 90.0% | 3 |
• Proportion of sampled ILI/SARI cases with available laboratory results | Number of ILI/SARI cases with available laboratory results / Number of sampled ILI/SARI cases | Case-based database | 99.0% | 3 |
• Proportion of collected variables included in the WHO recommended minimum data collection standard | Number of collected variables within the WHO list / Number of WHO recommended variables. | CIF and WHO guidelines for influenza sentinel surveillance. | 80.8% | 3 |
Timeliness | ||||
• Proportion of SMS sent on time | Number of SMS sent on time / Number of SMS sent | Aggregated data database | 80.0% | 3 |
• Proportion of samples received within 72 h from collection | Number of samples received within 72 h from collection / Number of samples received | Case-based database | 96.3% | 3 |
• Proportion of samples tested within one week from receipt | Number of samples tested within one week from receipt / Number of samples tested | Case-based database | 90.0% | 3 |
• Proportion of weekly reports issued within five days after the end of the reporting period | Number of weekly reports issued within five days after the end of the reporting period / Number of weekly reports issued | Weekly reports audit | 75.0% | 2 |
Representativeness | ||||
• Geographical coverage | Number of provinces covered by the influenza sentinel surveillance network / Total number of provinces | Geographic distribution of sentinel sites. | 45.5% | 1 |
• Inclusion of all age groups | Age distribution of cases SARI/ILI (median, minimum and maximum) | Case based database | Med.: 15 Y Min.: 0 Y Max.: 89 Y | 3 |
Flexibility | ||||
• Proportion of samples tested for pathogens other than influenza | Number of samples tested for pathogens other than influenza / Number of samples tested for influenza | Case-based database | 37.3% | 1 |
• Number of syndromes surveyed with the influenza surveillance system | Total, respiratory, gastro-intestinal and malaria admissions/consultations reported in the aggregated data form | Aggregated data database | Qualitative assessment | 3 |