| Literature DB >> 28693483 |
Jung-Seok Lee1, Mabel Carabali2,3, Jacqueline K Lim3, Victor M Herrera4, Il-Yeon Park3, Luis Villar4, Andrew Farlow5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dengue has been prevalent in Colombia with high risk of outbreaks in various locations. While the prediction of dengue epidemics will bring significant benefits to the society, accurate forecasts have been a challenge. Given competing health demands in Colombia, it is critical to consider the effective use of the limited healthcare resources by identifying high risk areas for dengue fever.Entities:
Keywords: Dengue; Dengue epidemic; Early warning system; Population at risk for dengue fever
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28693483 PMCID: PMC5504639 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-017-2577-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Data description
| Type | Degree resolution | Resampled resolutiona | Temporal resolution | Period | Period (12MA)b |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Air temperature | 0.5 by 0.5 | 0.008 by 0.008 | Monthly | Jan 2006 - Dec 2015 | Jan 2007 - Dec 2015 |
| Precipitation | 1 by 1 | 0.008 by 0.008 | Monthly | Jan 2006 - Dec 2015 | Jan 2007 - Dec 2015 |
| Specific humidity | 2.5 by 2.5 | 0.008 by 0.008 | Monthly | Jan 2006 - Dec 2015 | Jan 2007 - Dec 2015 |
| Night lights | 0.5 by 0.5 | 0.008 by 0.008 | Yearly | 2006–2013 | 2007–2013 |
| Elevation | 0.5 by 0.5 | 0.008 by 0.008 | NA | NA | NA |
aClimate datasets were resampled by using the nearest option in ArcGIS
b12-month moving average
Fig. 1Climate factors and DIP over time in Valle del Cauca*. * See Additional file 1: Supplementary 3 for other departments
Regression outputs of the CRF index on DIP
| Department | Number | Selected model |
| Constant (α) | CRF (β) | AICb | AIC (comparison)c | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antioquia | 108 | Poisson | 0.47 | −2.89 | *** | 0.31 | *** | 3.84 | 4.26 |
| Arauca | 108 | NBa | 0.00 | 2.00 | *** | 0.06 | *** | 8.46 | 30.37 |
| Boyaca | 108 | NB | 0.05 | −0.59 | 0.51 | *** | 4.26 | 4.19 | |
| Cauca | 108 | Poisson | 0.19 | −0.45 | * | 0.08 | *** | 3.53 | 3.58 |
| Cundinamarca | 108 | NB | 0.03 | −5.35 | *** | 0.52 | *** | 2.55 | 2.26 |
| Guaviare | 108 | NB | 0.02 | 3.23 | *** | −0.01 | 7.69 | 16.72 | |
| Huila | 108 | NB | 0.00 | 0.49 | 0.05 | *** | 7.87 | 14.33 | |
| Magdalena | 108 | NB | 0.00 | 0.92 | 0.02 | 5.44 | 7.05 | ||
| Norte de Santander | 108 | NB | 0.00 | 1.61 | *** | 0.05 | ** | 7.68 | 10.54 |
| Quindio | 108 | NB | 0.02 | −3.01 | *** | 0.11 | *** | 7.41 | 21.83 |
| Risaralda | 108 | Poisson | 0.11 | −0.62 | * | 0.07 | *** | 4.56 | 4.69 |
| Santander | 108 | NB | 0.00 | 1.07 | * | 0.06 | ** | 7.12 | 9.89 |
| Valle del Cauca | 108 | NB | 0.00 | −2.75 | *** | 0.12 | *** | 6.20 | 8.68 |
aNegative Binomial
bAkiake Information Criterion
cAICs for non-selected count models were presented for comparison. The AIC fit test was consistent with the Z-score test in terms of choosing a better model fit except Boyaca and Cundinamarca. Since the AIC differences were trivial for the two departments, the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) was further assessed, and NB was preferred over Poisson
* Significance at the 10% level, ** at the 5% level, *** at the 1% level
Fig. 2The CRF index and DIP over time in Valle del Cauca***. * DIP was smoothed out to reduce short-term fluctuations and highlight longer term trends for demonstration. **Zika cases were reported in 2015 as well, but zika incidence rates (/100,000) were not clearly shown for year 2015 due to the low number of reported cases. *** See Additional file 1: Supplementary 4 for other departments
Fig. 3Early Warning Signal in Valle del Cauca
Fig. 4EWS accuracy with the validation data in 2016
Sensitivity analysis with additional moving average scenarios
| Scenario | HR (sensitivity) | FAR | Specificity | Positive Predictive Value | Negative Predictive Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 month MA | 87.5% | 3.1% | 96.9% | 91.3% | 95.4% |
| 6 month MA | 75.0% | 4.7% | 95.3% | 85.7% | 91.0% |
| Current value (no MA) | 83.3% | 6.3% | 93.8% | 83.3% | 93.8% |
Fig. 5The CRF index with different moving average scenarios in Valle del Cauca
Fig. 6Identification of high risk areas in Dec, 2015*. * See Additional file 1: Supplementary 5 for more details