Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Previously submitted to: JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (no longer under consideration since Jun 06, 2019)

Date Submitted: Sep 27, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: Oct 4, 2018 - Oct 18, 2018
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint

Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).

Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.

Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).

Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.

Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.

Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Flutracking Australia Influenza-like Illness Surveillance System: Evolution of methods from 2006-2016

  • Sandra Jane Carlson; 
  • Craig Brian Dalton

This paper documents the evolution of Flutracking from a pilot online influenza-like illness (ILI) survey of 394 participants in a local health region to a national surveillance system with over 30,000 participants in 2016. In 2018, there were over 40,000 survey responses per week in most weeks. In particular, this paper will describe how the methods have developed to meet the 1) changing aims of the system; 2) developing capabilities of the system; and 3) participant growth. The aim of this paper is to provide insights to other groups initiating participatory public health surveillance systems and to assist users of our data and reports to better understand Flutracking methods. Some of the key changes to Flutracking from 2006 to 2016 include: allowing participants to respond on behalf of other household members from 2008; adding health seeking behaviour questions in 2011; and offering an express survey and follow-up of unknown test results from 2016 onwards. The Flutracking system has demonstrated its ability to adapt to changes with minimal disruption to participants, and maintain consistency in data collection and reporting. As an example of success, Flutracking has been integrated in the Australian Government Department of Health’s regular influenza reports, and is now contributing weekly data to the transmissibility and impact measures for the Australian Government Department of Health’s application of the Pandemic Influenza Severity Assessment system. Flutracking data have consistently aligned with the timing of the peak level of influenza activity from other Australian influenza surveillance systems. Flutracking provided a unique insight into 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic in 2009 demonstrating that the community level ILI attack rates were only slightly higher than 2008, and lower than 2007 in the community. Flutracking has demonstrated to be significantly less biased by treatment seeking behaviour and laboratory testing protocols than other surveillance systems during the 2009 influenza pandemic. In 2018, Flutracking expanded to New Zealand, with an average of over 2,800 surveys per week so far. The evolution of Flutracking’s methods has been pivotal to the success of this surveillance system.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Carlson SJ, Dalton CB

Flutracking Australia Influenza-like Illness Surveillance System: Evolution of methods from 2006-2016

JMIR Preprints. 27/09/2018:12337

DOI: 10.2196/preprints.12337

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/12337

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.