| Literature DB >> 29739467 |
Erin E Rees1, Tatiana Petukhova2, Mariola Mascarenhas2, Yann Pelcat3, Nicholas H Ogden3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Zika virus (ZIKV) spread rapidly in the Americas in 2015. Targeting effective public health interventions for inhabitants of, and travellers to and from, affected countries depends on understanding the risk of ZIKV emergence (and re-emergence) at the local scale. We explore the extent to which environmental, social and neighbourhood disease intensity variables influenced emergence dynamics. Our objective was to characterise population vulnerability given the potential for sustained autochthonous ZIKV transmission and the timing of emergence. Logistic regression models estimated the probability of reporting at least one case of ZIKV in a given municipality over the course of the study period as an indicator for sustained transmission; while accelerated failure time (AFT) survival models estimated the time to a first reported case of ZIKV in week t for a given municipality as an indicator for timing of emergence.Entities:
Keywords: Accelerated failure time survival model; Colombia; Environmental determinants; Logistic regression model; Public health surveillance; Risk analysis; Social bias; Zika
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29739467 PMCID: PMC5941591 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-018-2867-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Fig. 1Summary of modelling approach using logistic regression and AFT survival models
Summary of modelling approach given variables, their structure and hypothesized effects
| Model variables | Temporal scale | Municipal-level observations at temporal scale for | Hypothesized effect | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Environmental | Mean study period temperature, | Study period | Vector habitat suitability | |
| Mean weekly daytime temperature, | Weekly | Vector reproductive and survival rates; | ||
| Mean weekly nighttime temperature, | Weekly | Vector reproductive and survival rates; | ||
| Total study period precipitation (mm), | Study period | Vector habitat suitability | ||
| Total weekly precipitation (mm), | Weekly |
| Vector reproductive rate | |
| Mean Elevation (m), | Study period | Vector reproductive and survival rates; | ||
| Mean vector environmental suitability, | Study period | Vector habitat suitability; Vector reproductive and survival rates; | ||
| Social | Population density per km2, | Study period | Detection (higher population linked to more case investigations) | |
| Unsatisfied Basic Needs (% population), | Study period | Exposure related to housing quality; | ||
| Inter-municipal road connectivity, | Study period | Local movement of people to spread ZIKV | ||
| Road density per km2, | Study period | Local movement of people to spread ZIKV | ||
| Neighbourhood disease intensity | Nearest infected municipality (km), | Weekly | Controls for areas with autochthonous ZIKV transmission | |
| Proportion of neighbouring municipalities reporting ZIKV, | Weekly | Controls for areas with autochthonous ZIKV transmission | ||
Example structure of the serial outcome variables used in the logistic regression and the accelerated failure time (AFT) models as derived from the 48 week ZIKV surveillance data for a positive outcome (y = 1), negative outcome (y = 0), or right-censored data
| Modelling approach | Possible outcome, y | Weeks of study period | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | … | 48 | ||
| Logistic regression | Index case | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | … | 1 |
| First case detected in week 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | … | 1 | |
| No cases detected | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | … | 0 | |
| AFT model | Index case | 1 | – | – | – | – | – | … | – |
| First case detected in week 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | – | – | – | … | – | |
| No cases detected | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | … | 0 | |
Fig. 2Municipalities reporting ZIKV in Colombia in 2015 up to the end of October, November, and December, as well as January 2016. Municipalities estimated to be earliest case locations for October are outlined in red
Fig. 3The number of municipalities reporting their first case of Zika, per week, from October 2015 to September 2016
Parameters of the best model for the probability of reporting a first case of ZIKV in municipality i at week t
| Coefficient | Estimate | SE | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | -12.00 | 0.97 | -12.40 | < 0.01 |
| Mean study period temperature | 4.09 | 0.24 | 16.80 | < 0.01 |
| Total study period precipitation | -0.55 | 0.09 | -5.98 | 0.04 |
| UBN | -0.93 | 0.32 | -2.95 | < 0.01 |
| Connectivity | 0.95 | 0.25 | 3.86 | < 0.01 |
| Proportion of neighbours reporting ZIKV | 0.14 | 0.04 | 3.80 | < 0.01 |
| UBN × Connectivity | -0.37 | 0.16 | -2.38 | 0.02 |
Notes: UBN, unsatisfied basic needs; Connectivity, inter-municipal road connectivity; SE, standard error. See Additional file 3 for full model parameters and definitions of variable functional form transformations
Fig. 4Population vulnerability to ZIKV emergence as derived from the top selected model for the probability of reporting a first ZIKV case. The mapped values for the variables in the top selected model (respectively mean study period nighttime temperature, total study period precipitation and inter-hexagon road connectivity)
Parameters of the best model estimating time to first report of ZIKV in municipality i at week t
| Variable | Weight mean | Coef | SE(Coef) | Wald | AF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean elevation | 4.02 | -0.168 | 0.008 | < 0.01 | 0.85 |
| Total weekly precipitation (term 1) | -2.55 | -0.323 | 0.028 | < 0.01 | 0.71 |
| Total weekly precipitation (term 2) | 13.60 | -0.023 | 0.003 | < 0.01 | |
| UBN | 5.98 | -0.076 | 0.021 | < 0.01 | 0.93 |
| Connectivity | 2.79 | 0.157 | 0.029 | < 0.01 | 1.17 |
| Proportion of neighbours reporting ZIKV | 0.252 | 0.968 | 0.093 | < 0.01 | 2.63 |
| Distance to nearest municipality reporting ZIKV | -1.30 | -0.115 | 0.025 | < 0.01 | 0.89 |
| UBN X connectivity | -0.014 | 0.004 | < 0.01 | 0.99 | |
| Baseline parameters | |||||
| log(scale) | 3.274 | 0.154 | < 0.01 | ||
| log(shape) | 0.524 | 0.025 | < 0.01 | ||
Notes: AF acceleration factor, UBN unsatisfied basic needs, SE standard error. See Additional file 3 for definitions of variable functional form transformations
Fig. 5The accelerated failure times predicted by the best model during the period of October 24th 2015 to September 17th 2016 for the effects of municipality elevation (m) (a), total weekly precipitation (mm) (b), percentage of municipal population with unsatisfied basic needs (UBN) (c), inter-municipal connectivity (d), proportion of neighbouring municipalities reporting ZIKV (e), and nearest municipality reporting ZIKV (km) (f)