Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jun 10.
Published in final edited form as: Euro Surveill. 2016 May 19;21(20):10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.20.30234. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.20.30234

Table 1. Summary of evidence used for chikungunya virus transmission consensus scoring.

Evidence category Score
Health organisation status
Number of health organisationsa reporting epidemics or local transmission of chikungunya virus
3 +6/-6
2 +3/-3
Peer reviewed evidence
Date of chikungunya virus transmission occurrence
2005–2015 3
1997–2004 2
Pre-1997 1
Diagnostic procedure
Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) 3
IgM/IgG-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and haemaglutination inhibition 2
No specified test 1
Combination scoreb
3 typesb 3
2 typesb 2
1 typesb 1
Case data or health expenditure
Case data: most recent outbreak
0–7 years 9
7–14 years 6
14–21 years 3
28–35 years -3
≥35 years -6
If no case data: health expenditure in 2014
HE <100 USD + sporadic cases 6
HE <100 USD + sporadic cases 3
100 USD ≤HE ‹500 USD -3
HE ≥500 USD -9
Supplementary evidencec
Number of evidence typesc
4 typesc 6
3 typesc 4
2 typesc 2
a

The three health organisations considered included (i) the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), (ii) the Global Infectious Disease and Epidemiology Network (GIDEON) and (iii) the World Health Organization (WHO) and Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) taken together.

b

The types of evidences include (i) reports from health organisations, (ii) the date of chikungunya virus transmission occurrence, and (iii) the diagnostic procedure.

c

The types of evidences include (i) mosquito presence, (ii) dengue presence, (iii) travel advisories, and (iv) HealthMap.