This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: M2178v1 14/1/76    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Bloom, R. M. Articles by Cheng, K. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bloom, R. M. Articles by Cheng, K. E.

Finding Leading Indicators for Disease Outbreaks: Filtering, Cross-correlation, and Caveats

^a Applied Research Associates, Inc., Albuquerque, NM, USA
^b McGill Clinical and Health Informatics, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
^c Institut national de santé publique du Québec, Quebec, Canada

^_* Correspondence and reprints: David L. Buckeridge, McGill Clinical and Health Informatics, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McGill University, 1140 Pine Avenue West, Montreal, Quebec H3A 1A3. Tel: (514) 398-8355; Fax: (514) 843-1551. (Email: david.buckeridge{at}mcgill.ca).

Received for publication: 06/12/06; accepted for publication: 10/09/06.

Bioterrorism and emerging infectious diseases such as influenza have spurred research into rapid outbreak detection. One primary thrust of this research has been to identify data sources that provide early indication of a disease outbreak by being leading indicators relative to other established data sources. Researchers tend to rely on the sample cross-correlation function (CCF) to quantify the association between two data sources. There has been, however, little consideration by medical informatics researchers of the influence of methodological choices on the ability of the CCF to identify a lead–lag relationship between time series. We draw on experience from the econometric and environmental health communities, and we use simulation to demonstrate that the sample CCF is highly prone to bias. Specifically, long-scale phenomena tend to overwhelm the CCF, obscuring phenomena at shorter wave lengths. Researchers seeking lead–lag relationships in surveillance data must therefore stipulate the scale length of the features of interest (e.g., short-scale spikes versus long-scale seasonal fluctuations) and then filter the data appropriately—to diminish the influence of other features, which may mask the features of interest. Otherwise, conclusions drawn from the sample CCF of bi-variate time-series data will inevitably be ambiguous and often altogether misleading.