Measuring the Masses: Understanding Health Outcomes Arising from Mass Gatherings, Reporting Gaps, and Recommendations (Paper 2)

Abstract

Within the world of mass-gathering (MG) medicine and event medicine, researchers are making continued efforts to standardize data collection, analysis, and reporting.1-6 Given the number of MGs that occur annually around the globe, and the associated mortality and morbidity that can arise, it is time to harmonize post-event reporting on health outcomes. In the context of the present coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there is a world-wide “pause” onMGs. Perhaps this is the time for theMG research community to realign and sharpen the focus of this evolving academic field. Coordinating post-event reporting through the consistent capture and publication of essential data points will allow researchers and clinicians to make comparisons between events and across event types with the goal of mitigating or obviating negative outcomes for individuals and communities. In a recent paper, Turris, et al carried out an analysis of the current state of post-event reporting, with a focus on understanding and documenting patterns. The study found widespread reporting inconsistencies.7 As expected, a number of recommendations arise from an analysis of current state. Below is a summary of six identified gaps in reporting, along with ten initial recommendations for beginning to address the gaps (Table 1). These recommendations lay out a beginning roadmap for subsequent papers that may assist in addressing these important issues in the literature.