| Literature DB >> 30081828 |
Huiyan Yu1, Changkui Sun2, Wendong Liu1, Zhifeng Li1, Zhongming Tan1, Xiaochen Wang1, Jianli Hu3, Shanqiu Shi4, Changjun Bao1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the increasing incidence of scrub typhus in recent years, it is of great value to analyse the spatial and temporal distribution of scrub typhus by applying micro-geographical studies at a reasonably fine scale, and to guide the control and management.Entities:
Keywords: ENM; GIS; Maxent; Scrub typhus; Spatial epidemiology
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30081828 PMCID: PMC6080521 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-018-3271-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Fig. 1Spatial distribution of scrub typhus cases in Jiangsu Province, 2010–2015
Fig. 2Seasonal distribution of confirmed cases in Jiangsu Province, 2010–2015
Fig. 3Temporal distribution of cases in October and November in Jiangsu Province, 2010–2015
Demographic characteristics of scrub typhus cases in Jiangsu Province, 2010–2015
| Features | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | |||||||
| Male | 39(40.21) | 233(46.88) | 268(51.05) | 292(40.95) | 498(44.91) | 914(47.51) | 2224(46.13) |
| Female | 58(59.79) | 264(53.12) | 257(48.95) | 421(59.05) | 611(55.09) | 1010(52.49) | 2621(53.87) |
| Age | |||||||
| 0~ 9 | 4(4.12) | 14(2.82) | 14(2.67) | 7(0.98) | 14(1.26) | 13(0.68) | 66(1.36) |
| 10~ 19 | 0 | 3(0.60) | 1(0.19) | 3(0.42) | 10(0.90) | 10(0.52) | 27(0.55) |
| 20~ 29 | 1(1.03) | 12(2.41) | 12(2.29) | 15(2.10) | 34(3.07) | 42(2.18) | 116(2.38) |
| 30~ 39 | 5(5.15) | 23(4.63) | 26(4.95) | 34(4.77) | 56(5.05) | 77(4.00) | 221(4.54) |
| 40~ 49 | 13(13.40) | 71(14.29) | 96(18.29) | 110(15.43) | 166(14.97) | 288(14.97) | 744(15.29) |
| 50~ 59 | 32(32.99) | 130(26.16) | 122(23.24) | 177(24.82) | 254(22.90) | 457(23.75) | 1172(24.09) |
| 60~ 69 | 33(34.02) | 147(29.58) | 149(28.38) | 227(31.84) | 333(30.03) | 595(30.93) | 1484(30.50) |
| 70~ 79 | 7(7.22) | 77(15.49) | 85(16.19) | 103(14.45) | 198(17.85) | 355(18.45) | 825(16.96) |
| 80~ 100 | 2(2.06) | 20(4.02) | 20(3.81) | 37(5.19) | 44(3.97) | 87(4.52) | 210(4.32) |
| Occupation | |||||||
| Worker | 3(3.09) | 19(3.82) | 19(3.62) | 31(4.35) | 42(3.79) | 60(3.12) | 174(3.58) |
| Retiree | 3(3.09) | 16(3.22) | 18(3.43) | 27(3.79) | 40(3.61) | 85(4.42) | 189(3.88) |
| Student& children | 4(4.12) | 18(3.62) | 17(3.24) | 10(1.40) | 22(1.98) | 20(1.04) | 91(1.87) |
| Farmer | 82(84.54) | 413(83.10) | 441(84.00) | 619(86.82) | 946(85.30) | 1635(84.98) | 4136(85.02) |
| Unemployed | 2(2.06) | 16(3.22) | 12(2.29) | 14(1.96) | 43(3.88) | 64(3.33) | 151(3.10) |
| Teacher | 2(2.06) | 3(0.60) | 6(1.14) | 4(0.56) | 8(0.72) | 9(0.47) | 32(0.66) |
| Others | 1(1.03) | 12(2.41) | 12(2.29) | 8(1.12) | 8(0.72) | 51(2.65) | 92(1.89) |
%: constituent ratio
The suitable range and percent contribution of each environmental condition for scrub typhus occurrence
| Variable | Description(unit) | Suitable rangea | Percent contributiond |
|---|---|---|---|
| BIO_01 | Annual mean temperature(°C) | 11.3–14.3 | 1.8 |
| BIO_02 | Mean diurnal range | 8.7–10.7 | 14.5 |
| BIO_04 | Temperature seasonality | 920.0–980.0 | 24.9 |
| BIO_05 | Max temperature of warmest month(°C) | 31.7–32.8 | 1.1 |
| BIO_06 | Min temperature of coldest month(°C) | −4.2 to-1.2 | 19.9 |
| BIO_12 | Annual precipitation (mm) | 740.0–1000.0 | 3.6 |
| BIO_13 | Precipitation of wettest month (mm) | 196.0–275.0 | 8.7 |
| BIO_14 | Precipitation of driest month (mm) | 17.0–28.0 | 2.0 |
| BIO_15 | Precipitation seasonality (mm) | 58.0–82.0 | 3.6 |
| prec | Precipitation (mm) | 22.0–71.0 | 0.5 |
| tavg | Monthly average temperature (°C) | 8.9–11.1 | 5.6 |
| wind | Wind speed (m s-1) | 2.2–2.5 | 1.6 |
| NDVI | Normalized difference vegetation index | 0.18–0.39 | 7.5 |
| LC | Land cover type | 7,13,14b | 4.7 |
| DEM | Altitude(m) | nonec | 0.0 |
| Aspect | Aspect | nonec | 0.0 |
| Slope | Slope | nonec | 0.0 |
aThe suitable range of each variable indicates the conditions within which the probability of scrub typhus occurrence is higher than 50%
b7: Open shrublands; 13: Urban and Built-up; 14: Cropland-Natural Vegetation Mosaic. The combination of these classes could be found in and around the countryside
cNonemeans this environmental factor has little effect on the final model construction
dThe percentage contribution illustrates the relative contributions of the environmental variables to the final training Maxent model using the averages of the repeated 10 runs
Fig. 4Results of the Jackknife test of variable importance
Fig. 5Omission and predicted areas for scrub typhus
Model evaluation results of each single run
| Run | Training AUC | Testing AUC | Training omission ratea | Testing omission rate | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.833 | 0.827 | 0.009 | 0.017 | < 0.0001 |
| 2 | 0.832 | 0.829 | 0.008 | 0.005 | < 0.0001 |
| 3 | 0.832 | 0.833 | 0.011 | 0.022 | < 0.0001 |
| 4 | 0.833 | 0.827 | 0.009 | 0.010 | < 0.0001 |
| 5 | 0.833 | 0.828 | 0.009 | 0.012 | < 0.0001 |
| 6 | 0.832 | 0.841 | 0.008 | 0.010 | < 0.0001 |
| 7 | 0.833 | 0.835 | 0.008 | 0.005 | < 0.0001 |
| 8 | 0.833 | 0.822 | 0.009 | 0.022 | < 0.0001 |
| 9 | 0.832 | 0.833 | 0.011 | 0.010 | < 0.0001 |
| 10 | 0.834 | 0.818 | 0.008 | 0.015 | < 0.0001 |
aBalance training omission, predicted area and the threshold value
Fig. 6Predicted potential risk areas for scrub typhus in November in China
Fig. 7Spatial distribution of reported cases of scrub typhus in China