Skip to main content

[Critique] Implementing a public web based GIS service for feedback of surveillance data on communicable diseases in Sweden

Article by Per Rolfhamre1 , Katarzyna Grabowska1 and Karl Ekdahl1, 2
1Department of Epidemiology, Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control, Nobels väg 18, SE-17182 Solna, Sweden
2Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institute, SE-17177 Stockholm, Sweden

The authors have sufficiently summarized the study by including the purpose, methods, results, and conclusions or summary. The study was focused on the discussion of the considerations and technology of a created public web-based GIS service, which has already been deployed. The abstract is not entirely written in the past tense.

The article doesn’t have an introduction part, and instead presented a background of the study. Although citations are made, the review of literature was very minimal. There were no references to similar works done in the area of study in this part of the study. References to similar systems are done in the discussion of results part of the study. The underlying concepts, especially on the importance of making data on communicable diseases available to the public via internet, was only mentioned and barely discussed.

There was no hypothesis or research question posted on the study. What seemed to be the thrust of the study was the conjecture in that making surveillance data available in the internet, especially to public health officials, was key to policy-making, prioritization, and information related activities.

The authors have presented data collection and processing procedures in paragraph form. There was no further attempt to expound on the methods, and there were no charts or figures to support the discussion of the processing procedures. Likewise, the presentation of the hardware and software configuration was done in passing.

The authors were able to present and discuss the results of their study well. As their study was focused on the system, the basic application design, the work or process flow, database structure, user interface, and usage, were sufficiently presented. The discussion focused on the design principles used, security, performance, and quality concerns. There was mention of data interpretation, but this was for general consumption and only applied for the locality. This part of the study presented similar systems that already exist in other parts of the world, using a short comparison of features, but not as in-depth as necessary.

The authors made recommendations for improvements, and discussed possible enhancements and/or changes in the system, the area of study, and in the available technology.

Received 25 February 2004
Accepted 10 June 2004
Published 10 June 2004
© 2004 Rolfhamre et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.


Popular posts from this blog

March was a good month. Not just because it's my birthday month, but I've been able to do more physical exercises as far as I'm allowed, and I've also been able to get through my first month back in the job. For the first couple of weeks, I thought I was going to do 4 hours a day at most, and turn up the heat bit by bit until I'm able to do 100% again. But I suppose having to rest over a month does have its toll. It took significant effort to try not go all in with guns blazing on the first day back at work. LOL Anyway, I'm trying something new this year. We've migrated our applications to a better platform, and we'd like to push that to the cloud this year. It'll obviously need a lot of liaising and cooperative work with other teams and domains so I'm going to do more engagement and solutioning than the usual engineering this time. Last week, we did a platform-related hackathon and a critical refresh across clusters. There's going to be a lo

On Planning and Reports

In my previous employment, I didn't have any problems with submitting reports, practically because we used a time management/monitoring tool and the reports sort of generated by themselves. So when submitting daily reports isn't the norm here at the unit, quarterly reports become quite tricky. I've resorted to referring to Google Calendar as most of the stuff we do are usually scheduled. I've also thought of logging everything on a text file and have pelican publish this to my website. Meantime, my reading list for the day as I decide on a workflow that will allow multiple teams to work on the university website:

Thank you!

I am home, and enjoying my second lease in life, one slow day at a time. I have never been hospitalized for something as life-threatening as DHF with complications before, so it's a bit frustrating that even when I'm already out of the hospital, I could not move around as much as I want. I could not even attempt to lift and carry my son when he feels like asking me to hoist him up. I can only manage a few hours of work now and what's more disheartening is knowing that I can no longer recoup a week's worth of missed work. Well, that's how it is with us road warriors/freelancers. But I am alive. I survived my first bout against DHF + pneumonia, and I have God, family, and all the people He used to get to me, to thank for. So I'm taking this moment to write and thank EVERYONE who reached out, spread the word, contacted other people, prayed, donated blood, consoled my wife, watched over me when everyone else was exhausted, and so much more. You are all AWESOME and I