Table 1.
Study | Country | Period | Type of dengue case | Method | Expansion factors |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Duarte and Franca42 | Brazil | 1996–2002 | Hospitalized dengue case | Sensitivity of the surveillance system using hospital records as the reference | Overall = 1.6 (1.4–1.8); DHF = 1.4 (1.3–1.5); DF = 2.1 (1.6–3.0) |
Camacho and others63 | Colombia | 1995–1997 | All types of dengue cases | Sensitivity of the surveillance system using emergency room medical records as the reference | Overall = 9 |
Standish and others44 | Nicaragua | 2004–2008 | All types of dengue cases | Comparison of incidence obtained through active surveillance with reported incidence in the same area | Clinically diagnosed: 20.4 (2004–2008), 16 (2007–2008), 28 (2005–2006); lab-confirmed: 23.1 (2004–2008), 14 (2006–2007), 28 (2005–2006) |
Dechant and Rigau-Perez41 | Puerto Rico | 1991–1995 | Hospitalized dengue case | Capture–recapture method | 1991–1995 = 2.4; 1991 = 2.3; 1993 = 3.4 |
Rigau-Perez43 | Puerto Rico | 1988–1997 | Hospitalized dengue case | Sensitivity and specificity of the surveillance system compared with hospital records | Overall = 3 |
Figures in parentheses correspond to 95% confidence intervals assuming a binomial distribution for sensitivity analysis.