Learn
How HantaMap reviews sources before showing them on the map
HantaMap is intentionally cautious: a smaller set of reviewed source markers can be safer and clearer than a large unreviewed collection. This page explains how sources move from leads to reviewed map use.
HantaMap is built around source transparency and cautious health wording. A source is reviewed before it can support map context, because public-health references can be incomplete, revised, duplicated, or easy to misread outside their original setting.
Fewer markers can mean stricter review. HantaMap would rather show a limited set of reviewed source markers than fill the map with unreviewed rows, uncertain geography, or wording that looks more precise than the source allows.
Map markers are broad reviewed source notes, not individual case counts. They help readers find references and understand broad geography while preserving clear limits.
Review inputs
Source categories
Reports or pages from public-health institutions are preferred when they clearly support a broad geography, a source category, and careful wording. Even then, HantaMap summarizes only what the source supports.
Educational pages, surveillance definitions, and historical references can help readers understand terminology or regional context. These references usually stay in the Source Library or Learn pages instead of becoming map markers.
Some sources describe travel-associated public-health response context. HantaMap treats that material separately from ordinary country or regional markers and keeps the display broad and source-linked.
News items and other public leads can help reviewers discover material, but they do not become public map facts automatically. They need source checks, geography checks, and safer source wording first.
Generated or collected leads can sit in an internal review queue. Queue records are leads for reviewers, not public map data, until a separate manual review approves a specific public use.
A source can support a reviewed source marker only when the review is comfortable with the source, geography, wording, and display scope. The marker should help readers open the source and understand broad public-health context.
- The source is public and relevant to hantavirus context.
- The source supports a safe broad geography such as country, state, province, or region.
- The marker wording can be framed as a reviewed source note.
- The display does not depend on private or person-level information.
- The marker can link readers back to source material and methodology notes.
Not every useful source belongs on the map. Some material is safer and more helpful as a Source Library entry, Learn-page reference, methodology note, or internal review item.
- The source is useful for education but does not support a safe marker.
- The geography is too broad, ambiguous, or travel-associated for an ordinary land marker.
- The item is a lead that still needs source or geography review.
- The reference is better used to explain terminology, limitations, or external source definitions.
Raw rows can look more certain than they are. They may mix different source types, dates, geography levels, and review states. HantaMap avoids publishing unreviewed rows directly because the map should not suggest precision that the source review has not confirmed.
HantaMap also avoids person-level records. The map is designed for reviewed public-health references, not private medical information or individual-level monitoring.
If you find a public-health reference, correction, or better primary source, send the source URL, organization name, visible date, country or region, and a short note about what the source supports.
Suggested sources are reviewed before any public use. A suggestion may become source-library context, a methodology reference, a future reviewed marker candidate, or remain internal if it is not safe for display.
Suggest a source