Layout 1


ISDS Annual Conference Proceedings 2012. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-
Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

ISDS 2012 Conference Abstracts

The Epidemiologic Vocabulary of the West and the
Former Soviet Union: Different Sides of the Same
Science
Anna Grigoryan*1, Carmen Clarke2, Lyudmila Zueva3, Tetyana Chumachenko4, Edmond F.
Maes1 and Bonnie Smoak2

1CDC, Atlanta, GA, USA; 2WRAIR, Silver Spring, MD, USA; 3North-Western State Medical University after I.I. Mechnikov,
St.Petersburg, Russian Federation; 4Kharkiv National Medical University, Kharkiv, Ukraine

Objective
The purpose of this project was to develop an English-Russian Epi-

demiology Dictionary, which is needed for improved international
collaboration in public health surveillance.

Introduction
As part of the US Department of Defense strategy to counter bio-

logical threats, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency’s Cooperative
Biological Engagement Program is enhancing the capabilities of
countries in the former Soviet Union (FSU) to detect, diagnose, and
report endemic and epidemic, man-made or natural cases of espe-
cially dangerous pathogens. During these engagements, it was noted
that Western-trained and Soviet-trained epidemiologists have diffi-
culty, beyond that of simple translation, in exchanging ideas. 

The Soviet public health system and epidemiology developed in-
dependently of that of other nations. Whereas epidemiology in the
West is thought of in terms of disease determinants in populations
and relies on statistics to make inferences, classical Soviet epidemi-
ology is founded on a more ecological view with the main focus on
infectious diseases’ spread theory. Consequently many fundamental
Soviet terms and concepts lack simple correlates in English and other
languages outside the Soviet sphere; the same is true when attempt-
ing to translate from English to Russian and other languages of the
FSU. Systematic review of the differences in FSU and Western epi-
demiologic concepts and terminology is therefore needed for
strengthening understanding and collaboration in disease surveil-
lance, pandemic preparedness, response to biological terrorism, etc.

Methods
Following an extensive search of the Russian and English literature

by a working group of Western and FSU epidemiologists, we created
a matrix containing English and Russian definitions of key epidemi-
ologic terms found in FSU and Western epidemiology manuals and
dictionaries, such as A Dictionary of Epidemiology (1), Epidemiol-
ogy Manual (2) and many other sources. Particular emphasis was
placed on terms relating to infectious disease surveillance, analysis of
surveillance data, and outbreak investigation. In order to compare the
definitions of each term and to elucidate differences in usage and ex-
isting gaps, all definitions were translated into English and Russian
so that the definitions could be compared side by side and discussed
by the working group.

Results
Six hundred and thirty one terms from 27 English and 51 Russian

sources were chosen for inclusion based on their importance in ap-
plied epidemiology in either the West or the FSU. Review of the def-
initions showed that many terms within biosurveillance and infectious
disease public health practice are used differently, and some concepts
are lacking altogether in the Russian or English literature. Significant
gaps in FSU epidemiology are in the areas of biostatistics and epi-
demiologic study designs. There are distinctive differences in FSU
and Western epidemiology in the conceptualization and classification
of disease transmission, surveillance practices, and control measures.

Conclusions
Epidemiologic concepts and definitions significantly differed in

the FSU and Western literature. To improve biosurveillance and in-
ternational collaboration, recognition of these differences must occur.
Detailed analysis of epidemiology terminology differences will be
discussed in the presentation and paper. Major limitations of the work
were scarcity of prior research on the subject and lack of bilingual
epidemiologists with the good understanding of FSU and Western
approaches. A bilingual reference in the form of a dictionary will
greatly improve mutual comprehension and collaboration in the areas
of biosurveillance and public health practice.

Keywords
Surveillance; Dictionary; Collaboration

References

1. Porta Miquel. A Dictionary of Epidemiology, Fifth Edition, Oxford uni-
versity press, USA, 2008

2. Zueva L.P.Yafaev P.Kh. Epidemiology: Manual. “Foliant publishers”,
Russia, 2005.

*Anna Grigoryan
E-mail: Ffg7@cdc.gov

Online Journal of Public Health Informatics * ISSN 1947-2579 * http://ojphi.org * 5(1):e45, 2013