| Literature DB >> 23497202 |
Robert J Corner1, Ashraf M Dewan, Masahiro Hashizume.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Developing countries in South Asia, such as Bangladesh, bear a disproportionate burden of diarrhoeal diseases such as cholera, typhoid and paratyphoid. These seem to be aggravated by a number of social and environmental factors such as lack of access to safe drinking water, overcrowdedness and poor hygiene brought about by poverty. Some socioeconomic data can be obtained from census data whilst others are more difficult to elucidate. This study considers a range of both census data and spatial data from other sources, including remote sensing, as potential predictors of typhoid risk. Typhoid data are aggregated from hospital admission records for the period from 2005 to 2009. The spatial and statistical structures of the data are analysed and principal axis factoring is used to reduce the degree of co-linearity in the data. The resulting factors are combined into a quality of life index, which in turn is used in a regression model of typhoid occurrence and risk.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23497202 PMCID: PMC3610306 DOI: 10.1186/1476-072X-12-13
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Health Geogr ISSN: 1476-072X Impact factor: 3.918
Figure 1The study area.
Demographic, environmental and socioeconomic variables for each census tract
| Total population | From 2001 census records |
| Population density | Total population / census tract area |
| Household size (>5) | Number of households in tract with >5 occupants |
| NVDI | Mean of NDVI from five mosaiced image pairs |
| Temperature | Mean of LST from five mosaiced image pairs |
| Percent urban | From Land use/cover classification of 2000 image |
| Housing density | From RAJUK Detailed Area Plan and tract areas |
| Per capita land | From 2001 census records and tract area |
| Total literacy rate | As a percentage from 2001 census records |
| Percent unemployed | As a percentage from 2001 census records |
| Percent slum area | From digitised GeoEye image and tract area |
| Median housing value | Weighted analysis of residential data and census tracts |
| Households without safe water | As a percentage from 2001 census records |
| Households that own agricultural land | As a percentage from 2001 census records |
| Households without sanitation | As a percentage from 2001 census records |
Correlation matrix between variables
| TEMP | 1.000 | | | | | | | | | |
| NDVI | -0.797** | 1.000 | | | | | | | | |
| PURB | 0.830** | -0.830* | 1.000 | | | | | | | |
| MHV | -0.536** | 0.498** | 0.690** | 1.000 | | | | | | |
| TLR | -0.461** | 0.480* | 0.618** | 0.461** | 1.000 | | | | | |
| PCL | 0.096** | 0.047 | -0.153** | 0.307** | 0.089** | 1.000 | | | | |
| UNEMP | 0.167** | -0.123* | 0.220** | -0.358** | -0.151** | -0.905** | 1.000 | | | |
| PSLUM | 0.106** | -0.050 | 0.120** | -0.038 | -0.329** | -0.536** | -0.532** | 1.000 | | |
| PDEN | 0.476** | -0.549* | 0.492** | -0.238** | -0.284** | -0.073* | 0.121** | 0.062* | 1.000 | |
| HDEN | 0.562** | -0.590** | 0.561** | -0.278** | -0.311** | -0.076** | 0.117** | -0.049 | 0.857** | 1.000 |
** Statistically significant at 99% confidence level (2-tailed); * statistically significant at 95% confidence level (2-tailed); TEMP: temperature; NDVI: vegetation; PURB: percent urban land; MHV: median house value; TLR: total literacy rate; PCL: per capita land; UNEMP: percent unemployed; PSLUM: percent slum area; PDEN: population density; HDEN: housing density.
Figure 2Temporal distribution of typhoid disease, 2005–2009. a) Annual incidence rates. b) Monthly cases.
Distribution of typhoid cases by census tract, 2005-2009
| 2005 | 863 | 410 | 25 |
| 2006 | 678 | 358 | 32 |
| 2007 | 977 | 408 | 31 |
| 2008 | 986 | 453 | 28 |
| 2009 | 851 | 410 | 14 |
| Total | 4355 | 755 | 130 |
Figure 3Spatial distributions of typhoid incidence in DMA.
Factors loading and percentage of variance explained by social and environmental factors
| Factor 1: Environmental | 46.07% | |
| Percent urban | | -0.887 |
| Temperature | | -0.782 |
| Vegetation | | 0.891 |
| Factor 2: Economic | 25.55% | |
| Mean housing value | | 0.770 |
| Total literacy rate | | 0.743 |
| Per capita land | | 0.936 |
| Percent unemployed | | 0.925 |
| Percent slums | | 0.753 |
| Factor 3: Crowdedness | 11.60% | |
| Population density | | 0.921 |
| Housing density | | 0.903 |
| Sum of the variance explained | 83.24% |
Figure 4Synthetic quality of life index (QOL) for DMA.
Comparison of OLS and GWR results
| | ||||
| Factor 1 | 0.037 | 8087.46 | 0.606 | 7590.70 |
| Factor 2 | 0.105 | 7999.20 | 0.532 | 7597.18 |
| Factor 3 | 0.001 | 8132.79 | 0.633 | 7671.90 |
| QOL | 0.001 | 8132.20 | 0.731 | 7190.24 |
Figure 5Prediction map of risk of typhoid fever infection based on quality of life index (QOL).
Cut off values for risk categories
| <4.62 | Low risk |
| 4.62 to 16.81 | Moderate risk |
| 16.81> | High |