Skip to main content

Table 1 Mean indicators’ scores (range 1–3) for each attribute used for the evaluation of the influenza sentinel surveillance system in Zambia, 2011-2017a

From: An evaluation of the Zambia influenza sentinel surveillance system, 2011–2017

Attributes

Number of evaluated indicators

Mean score

Performance

• Data quality and completeness

7

2.9

Moderate to good

• Timeliness

2

2.5

Moderate

• Representativeness

2

2.0

Moderate to weak

• Flexibility

2

3.0

Good

• Simplicity

7

2.8

Moderate to good

• Acceptability

4

3.0

Good

• Stability

8

2.6

Moderate to good

• Utility

4

2.7

Moderate to good

• Sustainability

2

1.0

Weak

• Overall

38

2.6

Moderate to good

  1. aEach quantitative indicator was evaluated as the proportion (expressed as percentage) of the outcome of interest over the total. A scale from 1 to 3 was used to provide a score for each quantitative indicator as follows: < 60% (from the above calculation) scored 1 (weak performance); 60–79% scored 2 (moderate performance); ≥80% scored 3 (good performance). For indicators for which a proportion over a total could not be obtained (qualitative indicators) a score was assigned based on the same scale using expert consensus. The scores assigned to each indicator were averaged for all indicators evaluated for each attribute to provide a mean score for each surveillance attribute. An overall score for the surveillance system was obtained by averaging the scores of all evaluated indicators