1. Provide the title of your story or series and the names of the journalists involved.
Lessons from the H1N1 Pandemic
2. List date(s) this work was published or aired.
September 2010 (Clinical Lab Products)
3. Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
Pathologists, lab managers, administrators, and technologists are taking to heart lessons learned during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic as they prepare for the forthcoming 2010-11 influenza season in North America. Among those lessons: The need for better surveillance, improved rapid testing, enhanced molecular testing methods, and to invest in planning for the unexpected.
4. Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
Centers for Disease Control website (public information) World Health Organization website (public information)
5. Explain types of human sources used.
Interviews with hospital medical directors, diagnostic testing manufacturer, epidemiologists, biodefense consultant, infectious disease experts, hospital pathologist, director of disaster preparedness
6. Results (if any).
A broader story, beyond diagnostic technology, that examined not just public health issues but how politics drives R&D efforts in the surveillance and diagnostics of infectious diseases. For example, Bush Administration efforts surrounding H151 (avian flu) were driven by biodefense considerations; Obama Administration taking a much broader view of infectious diseases looking at anthrax, Ebola, malaria, pandemic flu, and other emerging diseases under the same public-health umbrella.
7. Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
No correction or clarification of this story. No challenges to its accuracy have come forth.
8. Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
In writing for trade publications, the danger is restricting the focus to technology only at the expense of a broader outlook. For example, human resource issues (in this case, the clinical lab focus on technology vs. how physicians will actually use diagnostic information in making patient-treatment decisions.)