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

AttributesNumber of evaluated indicatorsMean scorePerformance
• Data quality and completeness72.9Moderate to good
• Timeliness22.5Moderate
• Representativeness22.0Moderate to weak
• Flexibility23.0Good
• Simplicity72.8Moderate to good
• Acceptability43.0Good
• Stability82.6Moderate to good
• Utility42.7Moderate to good
• Sustainability21.0Weak
• Overall382.6Moderate 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