Table 2.
Cases reported on a more rapid time scale than traditional reporting methods were considered ECC cases. The percentage of missing data elements for ECC cases was calculated for the initial ECC submission and the resubmission of data for the reporting period of January–June 2012. Concordance was determined by assessing whether values present in the ECC submission were the same or different in the resubmission.
The six states were California, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, New York, and Oklahoma.
cECC initial (October 2012) and resubmission (April 2013) datasets were used.
dPercentage of missing data in each submission for variables listed
ePercentage of data concordance for variables listed. Missing values were excluded.