Table 1.

Characteristics of surveillance systems for Lyme disease in humans (framework for data extraction and analysis)

Characteristics	Definitions
Traditional systems
Administrative level	The responsibility to regulate and implement the system lies with the authority at the: • National level; OR • Subnational level
Key indicators	Definition of what is recorded as “Lyme disease”. More than one could be used: • Use of a case definition for EM, LNB, and/or other “late” clinical manifestations (e.g. Lyme carditis or arthritis), and whether these are based on clinical signs only and/or confirmed with a laboratory test. Where several levels of confidence are used (e.g. probable, confirmed), the definition for confirmed cases was extracted • Positive laboratory tests; • Medical patient consultations for tick bites, EM or other manifestations
Reporting entity	Unit responsible for reporting a positive case to the system: • The clinician treating a patient with the disease; OR • The laboratory; OR • Both the clinician and laboratory, either in the same or different areas of the country
Coverage	The surveillance system: • Is comprehensive (all reporting units are invited or required to report data); OR • Uses samples of reporting units (e.g. sentinels) or other non-comprehensive methods
Obligation	The reporting of information at the national level is: • Mandatory (e.g. by law); OR • Voluntary; OR • It varies between areas
Public participatory websites and apps
Indicators	The system collects information directly from the general public using a website and/or app. Indicators: tick bites, EM and/or other manifestations

Apps: mobile applications; EM: erythema migrans; LNB: Lyme neuroborreliosis

Framework adapted from [6]