Skip to main content

Table 4 Concerns among participants being ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ familiar with pathogen genomics expressed as the percentage being ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ concerned, Belgium, 2019. Subgroups: (i) data providers (n=62) including microbiologists, molecular biologists, bioinformaticians, and clinical biologists, and (ii) data end-users (n=54) including epidemiologists, local infection control practitioners, hospital hygienists, and clinicians

From: Perceived utility and feasibility of pathogen genomics for public health practice: a survey among public health professionals working in the field of infectious diseases, Belgium, 2019

  Overall (n=116) Data providers (n=62) Data end-users (n=54)
Quality of the pathogen sequence data (validation and accreditation of both wet and dry lab protocols) 63% 73% 52%
Timeliness of the pathogen sequence data (turn-around time) 67% 76% 57%
Integration of pathogen sequence data with other types of data (e.g. clinical and epidemiological data) 70% 61% 79%
Linking pathogen sequence data from different sources (human/food/animal/environment) 59% 55% 64%
Translation of pathogen sequence data into public health action (usefulness) 68% 64% 71%
Interdisciplinary working/coordination between epidemiologists, microbiologists, bioinformaticians, etc. 75% 79% 70%
Cost of sequencing technologies 86% 87% 85%
Expertise and availability of personnel to be able to generate pathogen sequence data (wet lab) 60% 64% 55%
Expertise and availability of personnel to be able to analyze pathogen sequence data (bioinformatics) 75% 82% 67%
Timely and open sharing of pathogen sequence data and accompanying metadata 81% 89% 72%
Infrastructure (sequencers, high-performance computing, data storage, etc.) 67% 74% 59%
Availability of WGS typing schemes and reference databases (e.g. for antimicrobial resistance) 73% 79% 67%
Ethical and legal issues (e.g. patient privacy) 54% 56% 52%
\