Comments from clinicians on the APSU mailing list in response to the question: “Any other criticisms or suggestions for improving the APSU?”
| Comment | Number | Percentage2-150 |
|---|---|---|
| Keep up the good work | 52 | 21 |
| Time delay between notification of a case to the APSU and subsequent contact for collection of further clinical information is a burden and may compromise validity of data | 15 | 6 |
| Data collection is a burden; investigators should be more responsible for extracting individual patient data | 13 | 5 |
| Acknowledgment of the contribution of reporting clinicians should have more prominence in publications emanating from the APSU or studies conducted through it | 12 | 5 |
| Mailing should be less frequent than monthly | 9 | 4 |
| Problems with physician recall might affect data validity | 8 | 3 |
| There should be more feedback from the APSU regarding its findings, distribution of continuing education type material, and objective evidence of its value. Request for more publications in peer reviewed journals | 6 | 2 |
| Some common conditions should be included on the monthly card | 6 | 2 |
| There is potential for under-reporting by some clinicians because of assumption in some cases that others will report | 5 | 2 |
| Keep surveillance of conditions to defined length of time and cease surveillance after predefined objective is reached. Include more conditions of public health relevance | 5 | 2 |
| Disagreement with case definition or diagnostic terminology; suggest more involvement of related subspecialists in development of case definition | 4 | 2 |
| The APSU is a complete waste of time and money | 4 | 2 |
| Suggest ongoing monitoring of what is being reported monthly so that relevant trends (such as early epidemic) can be identified | 3 | 1 |
| Amount of clinical detail requested following a positive report has discouraged further reporting (includes request for stool samples) | 3 | 1 |
| Concern that access to or relevance of the APSU as a research tool is limited to individuals based at university teaching hospitals | 3 | 1 |
| No follow up was requested on cases reported to the APSU | 3 | 1 |
↵2-150 248 of 766 respondents provided comments; the proportion of the 248 who provided comments is shown. Some respondents provided more than one comment. Comments are summarised, in broad categories, in rank order of frequency.