高级检索
陆明领, 袁俊, 王鸣, 杨智聪, 刘于飞, 刘艳慧, 谢朝军, 陈建东, 陆家海. 基于One Health理念建立新型禽流感风险评估指标体系[J]. 中国公共卫生, 2016, 32(12): 1660-1665. DOI: 10.11847/zgggws2016-32-12-15
引用本文: 陆明领, 袁俊, 王鸣, 杨智聪, 刘于飞, 刘艳慧, 谢朝军, 陈建东, 陆家海. 基于One Health理念建立新型禽流感风险评估指标体系[J]. 中国公共卫生, 2016, 32(12): 1660-1665. DOI: 10.11847/zgggws2016-32-12-15
LU Ming-ling, YUAN Jun, WANG Ming.et al, . Construction of a risk assessment index system for novel or reassortant avian influenza epidemic based on One Health concept[J]. Chinese Journal of Public Health, 2016, 32(12): 1660-1665. DOI: 10.11847/zgggws2016-32-12-15
Citation: LU Ming-ling, YUAN Jun, WANG Ming.et al, . Construction of a risk assessment index system for novel or reassortant avian influenza epidemic based on One Health concept[J]. Chinese Journal of Public Health, 2016, 32(12): 1660-1665. DOI: 10.11847/zgggws2016-32-12-15

基于One Health理念建立新型禽流感风险评估指标体系

Construction of a risk assessment index system for novel or reassortant avian influenza epidemic based on One Health concept

  • 摘要: 目的 基于One Health理念建立人感染新型禽流感风险评估指标体系,为新型禽流感的预防控制提供科学依据。方法 采用文献检索和头脑风暴法初步拟定风险评估指标体系,通过德菲尔法和层次分析法相结合的方法构建风险评估指标体系并确定各级指标的权重。结果 2轮专家咨询的积极系数均为100%;第1轮二、三级指标专家权威系数均值分别为(0.876 3±0.027 1)、(0.865 3±0.037 8),第2轮二、三级指标专家权威系数均值分别为(0.875 0±0.042 4)、(0.880 6±0.029 9);第1轮二、三级指标的综合平均得分分别为(4.154 0±0.227 4)、(4.019 5±0.316 4)分,第2轮二、三级指标综合平均得分分别为(4.236 2±0.235 4)、(4.127 1±0.266 7)分;第1、2轮咨询专家意见协调系数分别为0.346 0和0.286 0,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05),全部专家对整个指标的评价意见协调;经过2轮专家咨询建立了人感染H7N9、H5N6等新型禽流感风险评估指标体系,该指标体系包括一级指标5个、二级指标13个、三级指标87个。结论 本研究建立的新型禽流感风险评估指标体系可为新型禽流感的预测和防控以及卫生资源的合理分配提供依据,综合平均得分靠前的指标可作为目前评估人感染新型禽流感风险的基本指标。

     

    Abstract: Objective To establish a risk assessment index system for novel or reassortant avian influenza epidemic based on One Health concept and to provide evidences for prevention and control of novel avian influenza.Methods Brain storming sessions and literature review were conducted to formulate a preliminary index system frame,Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) were applied to screen the indexes and determine the weight of each index.Results The activity coefficients of both round consultations were 100%.For the first round of consultation,the means of authority coefficient of the second-class and the third-class indicators were 0.876 3±0.027 1 and 0.865 3±0.037 8,and those for the second round of consultation were 0.875 0±0.042 4 and 0.880 6±0.029 9,respectively.The comprehensive mean scores for the second and third class indexes were 4.154 0±0.227 4 and 4.019 5±0.306 4 for the first round consultation and 4.236 2±0.235 4 and 4.127 1±0.266 7 for the second round consultation.Totally 5 first-,13 second-,and 87 third-class indicators were included in the established risk assessment index system for H7N9,H5N6 and other novel or reassortant avian influenza.Conclusion The study constructed an index system for risk assessment for novel or reassortant avian influenza epidemic and the system may provide evidences for the prevention and control of the epidemic and reasonable allocation of health resources and major indexes of the system could be adopted to evaluate the risk of human infection of novel avian influenza viruses.

     

/

返回文章
返回