Appendix 1 – Criteria for NNDL assessments Criterion Score Guide for use Priority setting 0= not important for public health to know about a Subjectively ranked, based on the need and efficacy of a Necessity for public health response by public health authorities to prevent other case response cases of the disease, e.g. case and contact management, 1= case reporting important for describing trends including need for national level responses, e.g. national only input to contact tracing, funding of vector control programs, funding of vaccination programs, 2= case reporting important for detecting foodborne disease investigations. Other outbreaks that require investigating or contacts aspects to consider are: require routine intervention For monitoring emerging diseases 3= case reporting important to detect outbreaks of For other diseases, where prevention programs cases and investigate contacts that require or a public health response may be required if immediate intervention to prevent fatalities or there is a significant change in epidemiology severe outcomes The need for consistent longitudinal data 4= a single case can be considered an outbreak or Alternative surveillance mechanisms having the potential to cause an outbreak and requires immediate follow-up Utility and significance of 0 = No national prevention program / international notification for prevention or national regulation Note: National prevention programs do not include programs vaccination here; that is covered by question 3. 1 = Need to establish burden of illness for monitoring or research purposes / priority setting 2 = Notifiable to the WHO but no regional / global targets for elimination or eradication
Appendix 1 – Criteria for NNDL assessments Criterion Score Guide for use Priority setting Necessity for public health response 0= not important for public health to know about a case 1= case reporting important for describing trends only 2= case reporting important for detecting outbreaks that require investigating or contacts require routine intervention 3= case reporting important to detect outbreaks of cases and investigate contacts that require immediate intervention to prevent fatalities or severe outcomes 4= a single case can be considered an outbreak or having the potential to cause an outbreak and requires immediate follow-up Subjectively ranked, based on the need and efficacy of a response by public health authorities to prevent other cases of the disease, e.g. case and contact management, including need for national level responses, e.g. national input to contact tracing, funding of vector control programs, funding of vaccination programs, foodborne disease investigations. Other aspects to consider are: For monitoring emerging diseases For other diseases, where prevention programs or a public health response may be required if there is a significant change in epidemiology The need for consistent longitudinal data Alternative surveillance mechanisms Utility and significance of notification for prevention programs 0 = No national prevention program / international or national regulation 1 = Need to establish burden of illness for monitoring or research purposes / priority setting 2 = Notifiable to the WHO but no regional / global targets for elimination or eradication Note: National prevention programs do not include vaccination here; that is covered by question 3.