The next severe epidemic will demand more than clinical and public-health capacity. It will also need rapid, credible statistical work - surveillance design, modeling under uncertainty, data quality assessment, study design under time pressure, and clear communication of risk to decision-makers and the public.
I want to start a practical discussion among ASA members about what our profession should be doing now, before the next crisis. This is not about personal health precautions. It's about what we bring as statisticians, biostatisticians, data scientists, survey researchers, and methodologists.
Some questions worth asking:
• What can we do now to prepare - in methods, infrastructure, training, or standing relationships with agencies and health systems?
• What do we need from others to do our part well?
• What should we be ready to supply when the time comes: rapid peer review, volunteer analytic capacity, data-quality standards, modeling support, plain-language uncertainty communication for decision-makers?
• What role would ASA, its sections, committees, and chapters play at the federal, state, and local level?
• How do we keep data collection and public communication scientifically sound, transparent, and privacy-protective under crisis pressure?
• Are there existing efforts within ASA or elsewhere that we should connect with rather than duplicate?
• What other questions should we be asking now?
We need concrete thinking: what should ASA members, chapters, sections, and committees actually do over the next 6–12 months so our profession is genuinely ready when the next severe epidemic hits?
------------------------------
Alan Forsythe, PHD
Fellow ASA
------------------------------