The authors frame the work within updated global guidance for integrated respiratory surveillance, citing WHO's revised integrated surveillance guidance and the Mosaic Respiratory Surveillance Framework. Traditional influenza surveillance has relied on influenza-like illness (ILI) rates and proportions of laboratory tests positive for influenza, with sample-size decisions driven by precision of proportion estimates. The transition out of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic period motivates integrated surveillance of multiple respiratory pathogens and consideration of several surveillance objectives beyond point estimates, including outbreak detection, situational awareness and evaluation of intensity.
The paper aims to illustrate how to design primary care sentinel surveillance to meet multiple objectives simultaneously. The authors emphasise that different objectives imply different optimal sample sizes and that a single sample-size rule based on precision of a proportion may not be adequate when detection timing or probability is the priority.
Using England's integrated sentinel primary care surveillance system as an exemplar, the authors propose several metrics for integrated monitoring of respiratory pathogen circulation:
A composite proxy of respiratory activity defined as the product of the acute respiratory infection (ARI) consultation rate and the proportion of tests positive for at least one pathogen. This metric is intended to capture combined changes in consultation behaviour and laboratory positivity.
Pathogen-specific ARI-based activity proxies to provide more detailed monitoring for individual agents such as influenza and SARS-CoV-2. These ARI-based proxies link syndromic consultation data with pathogen-specific test positivity.
Integrated monitoring of proportions positive for all pathogens tested, extending the usual focus on influenza to encompass multiple co-circulating respiratory pathogens.
These metrics represent different data types and signal behaviours; consequently, the authors treat them separately when evaluating sample-size requirements for different surveillance objectives.
The core methodological approach is simulation. The authors generate simulated data intended to mimic publicly available aggregate surveillance data (details of sources used to simulate are provided in the manuscript). Sample sizes are determined by optimising surveillance performance according to the relevant objective: either maximising the probability of detecting prespecified events in the monitored metric, or minimising the time to detection of those events.
The simulations consider different event types (for example, early-season outbreaks versus sustained increases) and explore how detection probability and detection timing vary with the number of swabs or tests conducted. The simulation framework is applied to the three settings chosen for comparison: England, the USA and Hong Kong.
Across metrics and objectives the authors find that required sample sizes are context-dependent. Key comparative observations reported in the manuscript include:
At the national level, the current sample sizes used in the USA and Hong Kong are sufficient to detect most events in most weeks for the metrics and objectives considered.
For England, the number of swabs taken from ILI consultations may be insufficient in some weeks, particularly at the start of the respiratory season when early outbreak detection is critical. This indicates a vulnerability in an approach that restricts swabbing to a narrower ILI case definition.
Broadening the swabbing criteria to include acute respiratory symptoms (ARI) increases the pool of swabs and, according to the simulations, can provide sufficient sample sizes to meet detection-oriented objectives in England.
The manuscript emphasises that optimal sampling strategies differ by metric, objective and setting; therefore, surveillance designs should be tailored rather than one-size-fits-all.
The findings suggest practical programmatic implications for sentinel primary care surveillance systems. When outbreak detection or rapid detection is prioritised, sample-size calculations should be based on the probability or time-to-detection performance of the chosen metric rather than solely on precision of proportion estimates. In England specifically, expanding swabbing beyond ILI to a broader acute respiratory presentation can materially improve detection capability early in the season.
For jurisdictions where current national-level sampling appears sufficient (as reported for the USA and Hong Kong), systems should still consider whether subnational or subgroup analyses (not reported in detail in the preprint) require increased sampling. The authors also underline that different metrics (composite respiratory proxies versus pathogen-specific proxies) will demand different sampling intensities.
The analyses are based on simulated data that were constructed to mimic publicly available aggregate surveillance data; the repository containing simulation data and code is publicly available at the URL provided in the manuscript. The authors note that the underlying pseudo-anonymised individual-level surveillance data that informed the aggregates are not publicly available and were collected under UK regulatory permissions.
Ethical and governance statements in the paper describe compliance with relevant guidelines and approvals or exemptions. The paper also declares a competing interest related to post-marketing surveillance work carried out by the Immunisations and Vaccine Preventable Diseases division at UKHSA for influenza vaccine manufacturers. Funding for the study was provided by the Medical Research Council.
All findings and values described here derive from the preprint's simulations and narrative. The manuscript reports that sample-size requirements vary by metric, objective, event and country/region; specific numerical sample-size thresholds or week-by-week performance metrics are reported in the full manuscript but are not reproduced here. Where the source did not report granular numeric results in the abstract and summary material, those specific details are not included in this summary.