| Literature DB >> 23556015 |
Jun-Fang Xu1, Jing Xu, Shi-Zhu Li, Tia-Wu Jia, Xi-Bao Huang, Hua-Ming Zhang, Mei Chen, Guo-Jing Yang, Shu-Jing Gao, Qing-Yun Wang, Xiao-Nong Zhou.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The transmission of schistosomiasis japonica in a local setting is still poorly understood in the lake regions of the People's Republic of China (P. R. China), and its transmission patterns are closely related to human, social and economic factors. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23556015 PMCID: PMC3605232 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002123
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
The results of IHA and Kato-Katz in residents of study villages.
| IHA results | Kato-Katz results | ||||||
| village | Total | Number of positive | Positive rate (%) | Total | Number of positive | Positive rate (%) | Adjusted infection rate (%) |
| Sanzha | 448 | 84 | 18.75 | 70 | 12 | 17.14 | 3.21 |
| Qinggang | 411 | 70 | 17.03 | 66 | 10 | 15.15 | 2.58 |
| Zhongqiao | 377 | 103 | 27.32 | 90 | 10 | 11.11 | 3.04 |
| Luyangtai | 311 | 44 | 14.15 | 40 | 7 | 17.50 | 2.48 |
| Liugang | 248 | 20 | 8.06 | 18 | 1 | 5.56 | 0.45 |
| Qingan | 544 | 32 | 5.88 | 30 | 1 | 3.33 | 0.20 |
The results of logistic regression model and BP artificial neural network.
| Original variable | Crude Association Analysis | Logistic Regression Model | BP ANN | ||||||
| χ2 | P Value | variables/dummy variables | Standard partial regression coefficient | Odds Ratio (OR) | 95%CI | mean impact value (MIV) | Rank of |MIV| | ||
| lower | upper | ||||||||
| Prevalence level (PL) | 68.5673 | <0.0001 | - | - | - | - | - | 0.0054 | 10 |
| Village level (VL) | 95.6636 | <0.0001 | - | - | - | - | - | −0.0032 | 12 |
| Sanzha | 0.1200 | 1.7380 | 1.205 | 2.507 | - | - | |||
| Qinggang | 0.1052 | 1.6510 | 1.117 | 2.440 | - | - | |||
| Zhongqiao | 0.2008 | 2.6920 | 1.868 | 3.880 | - | - | |||
| Luyangtai | 0.0787b | 1.5220 | 0.992 | 2.336 | - | - | |||
| Liugang | −0.045a | 0.7670 | 0.446 | 1.319 | - | - | |||
| Qingan | - | 1.0000 | - | - | - | - | |||
| Ground of courtyard (GC) | 11.6019 | 0.0206 | - | - | - | - | - | −0.0053 | 11 |
| Family latrines | 16.8748 | 0.0007 | - | - | - | - | - | 0.0028 | 13 |
| (FL)Family with past infection (FPI) | 949.524 | <0.0001 | - | - | - | - | - | 0.0231 | 2 |
| Economic conditions of family (ECF) | 76.6435 | <0.0001 | - | - | - | - | - | 0.0020 | 15 |
| Good | −0.3280 | 0.2660 | 0.191 | 0.372 | - | - | |||
| General | −0.2822 | 0.3590 | 0.277 | 0.466 | - | - | |||
| Poor | - | 1.0000 | - | - | - | - | |||
| Age group (AG) | 1.1177 | 0.9525 | −0.0110 | 6 | |||||
| >55 | −0.4060 | 0.1790 | 0.110 | 0.292 | - | - | |||
| 45–55 | −0.3831 | 0.2200 | 0.137 | 0.352 | - | - | |||
| 35–45 | −0.3134 | 0.2700 | 0.168 | 0.434 | - | - | |||
| 25–35 | −0.1240 | 0.3920 | 0.215 | 0.715 | - | - | |||
| 15–25 | −0.1150 | 0.4190 | 0.229 | 0.766 | - | - | |||
| ≤15 | - | 1.0000 | - | - | - | - | |||
| Education level (EL) | 9.5793 | 0.0481 | Literacy/Illiteracy | −0.1933 | 0.4530 | 0.355 | 0.578 | −0.0059 | 8 |
| Infection history (IH) | 24.1748 | <0.0001 | - | - | - | - | - | 0.0145 | 4 |
| Category of the disease (CD) | 25.6729 | <0.0001 | - | - | - | - | - | −0.0061 | 7 |
| treatment history TH) | 35.3426 | <0.0001 | - | - | |||||
| Medicine varieties (MV) | 47.7618 | <0.0001 | - | - | - | - | - | −0.0057 | 9 |
| Infection times (IT) | 38.2776 | <0.0001 | - | - | - | - | - | −0.0110 | 5 |
| >10 times | 0.1103 | 1.5110 | 1.074 | 2.126 | - | - | |||
| 6–10 times | 0.1550 | 1.9870 | 1.352 | 2.920 | - | - | |||
| 3–5 times | 0.0880 | 2.0760 | 1.166 | 3.698 | - | - | |||
| 1–2 times | 0.1212 | 3.9700 | 2.043 | 7.716 | - | - | |||
| 0 times | 1.0000 | - | - | - | - | ||||
| History of water contact (HWC) | 12.2687 | 0.0005 | Yes/No | 0.033a | 1.1750 | 0.792 | 1.743 | −0.0152 | 3 |
| Main agriculture activity of water contact (AAWC) | 14.2606 | 0.014 | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Main lifestyle of water contact (LSWC) | 17.9678 | 0.003 | - | - | - | - | - | −0.0024 | 14 |
| Main recreation of water contact (RWC) | 13.3443 | 0.0097 | - | - | - | - | - | −0.0017 | 16 |
| Frequency to contact with infested water (FCW)) | 19.1222 | 0.0018 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Protective measure(PM) | 14.2109 | 0.0008 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Months to contact with water (MCW) | 19.6447 | 0.0006 | - | - | |||||
| Integration of water contact history and infection history (WCH-IH) | 28.0919 | <0.0001 | - | - | - | - | - | 0.0305 | 1 |
Note: a:p>0.05, b:0.05
The fitness index of logistic regression and BP artificial neural network.
| Model | Index | Value |
| Logistic regression | Akaike's information criterion | 1793.805 |
| test of Likelihood ratio | 1358.1638 (p<0.0001) | |
| the determination coefficient | 0.5984 | |
| Artificial Neural Network | mean squared error | 0.0734 |
| the magnitude of the gradient | 0.0019082 | |
| Validation checks | 0 | |
| correlation coefficient | 0.65361 |
Figure 1The configuration of the final BP ANN.
Figure 4The regression plot to validate the network trained.
The regression plot showed the relationship between the outputs of the network and the targets, showing the training of the network were perfect, or network outputs were exactly equal to the targets, but the relationship is rarely perfect in practice.