Eurosurveillance - Volume 22, Issue 40, 05 October 2017

Decisions in public health should be based on the best available evidence, reviewed and appraised using a rigorous and transparent methodology. The Project on a Framework for Rating Evidence in Public Health (PRECEPT) defined a methodology for evaluating and grading evidence in infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control that takes different domains and question types into consideration. The methodology rates evidence in four domains: disease burden, risk factors, diagnostics and intervention. The framework guiding it has four steps going from overarching questions to an evidence statement. In step 1, approaches for identifying relevant key areas and developing specific questions to guide systematic evidence searches are described. In step 2, methodological guidance for conducting systematic reviews is provided; 15 study quality appraisal tools are proposed and an algorithm is given for matching a given study design with a tool. In step 3, a standardised evidence-grading scheme using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) methodology is provided, whereby findings are documented in evidence profiles. Step 4 consists of preparing a narrative evidence summary. Users of this framework should be able to evaluate and grade scientific evidence from the four domains in a transparent and reproducible way.

Screening asylum seekers for infectious diseases is widely performed, but economic evaluations of such are scarce. We performed a policy analysis and economic evaluation of such screening in Germany, and analysed the effect of screening policies on cost differences between federal states. Of the 16 states, screening was compulsory for tuberculosis (TB) in asylum seekers ≥ 16 years of age in all states as well as in children < 16 years of age and pregnant women in six states, hepatitis B and enteropathogens in three, syphilis in two and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in one state. Of 441,899 asylum seekers, 88.0% were screened for TB, 22.9% for enteropathogens, 16.9% for hepatitis B, 13.1% for syphilis and 11.3% for HIV. The total costs for compulsory screening in 2015 were 10.3 million euros (EUR). Costs per case were highest for infections with Shigella spp. (80,200 EUR), Salmonella spp. (8,000 EUR), TB in those ≥ 16 years of age (5,300 EUR) and syphilis (1,150 EUR). States with extended screening had per capita costs 2.84 times those of states that exclusively screened for TB in asylum seekers ≥ 16 years of age (p < 0.0001, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.96–4.10). Screening practices in Germany entailed high costs; evidence-based approaches to infectious disease screening are needed.