| Literature DB >> 32959625 |
F Baldassi1, O Cenciarelli2, A Malizia3, P Gaudio1.
Abstract
The rapid detection of ongoing outbreak - and the identification of causative pathogen - is pivotal for the early recognition of public health threats. The emergence and re-emergence of infectious diseases are linked to several determinants, both human factors - such as population density, travel, and trade - and ecological factors - like climate change and agricultural practices. Several technologies are available for the rapid molecular identification of pathogens [e.g. real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR)], and together with on line monitoring tools of infectious disease activity and behaviour, they contribute to the surveillance system for infectious diseases. Web-based surveillance tools, infectious diseases modelling and epidemic intelligence methods represent crucial components for timely outbreak detection and rapid risk assessment. The study aims to integrate the current prevention and control system with a prediction tool for infectious diseases, based on regression analysis, to support decision makers, health care workers, and first responders to quickly and properly recognise an outbreak. This study has the intention to develop an infectious disease regressive prediction tool working with an off-line database built with specific epidemiological parameters of a set of infectious diseases of high consequences. The tool has been developed as a first prototype of a software solution called Infectious Diseases Seeker (IDS) and it had been established in two main steps, the database building stage and the software implementation stage (MATLAB® environment). The IDS has been tested with the epidemiological data of three outbreaks occurred recently: severe acute respiratory syndrome epidemic in China (2002-2003), plague outbreak in Madagascar (2017) and the Ebola virus disease outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo (2018). The outcomes are promising and they reveal that the software has been able to recognize and characterize these outbreaks. The future perspective about this software regards the developing of that tool as a useful and user-friendly predictive tool appropriate for first responders, health care workers, and public health decision makers to help them in predicting, assessing and contrasting outbreaks.Entities:
Keywords: Infectious diseases; epidemiology; modelling; outbreaks; pathogens
Year: 2020 PMID: 32959625 PMCID: PMC7758858 DOI: 10.2991/jegh.k.200714.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Epidemiol Glob Health ISSN: 2210-6006
Example of a database string and the epidemiological parameters reported. A 95% confidence interval for all of the detailed numeric parameters has been considered
| Ebola virus | Ebola hemorrhagic fever | Central Africa, Western Africa | Fever, severe headache, muscle pain, weakness, fatigue, diarrhoea, vomiting, abdominal (stomach) pain, lack of appetite, unexplained haemorrhage (bleeding or bruising) | No vector | All | Male, female | Blood, body fluids, zoonotic disease, sexual |
| Transmission routes detailed information | Reservoir/host/source | CFR (decimals) | Transmission rate (day−1) | Incubation rate (day−1) | Recovery rate (day−1) | Infectious mortality rate (day−1) | |
| Blood or body fluids (urine, saliva, sweat, faeces, vomit, breast milk, and semen), Objects (such as needles and syringes) contaminated with body fluids from a person sick with EVD or the body of a person who died from EVD; Infected fruit bats or nonhuman primates (such as apes and monkeys); Semen from a man who recovered from EVD (through oral, vaginal, or anal sex). | Human, bat, primate, chimpanzees, gorillas, fruit bats, monkeys, forest antelope, porcupines | 0.5 | 0.284 | 0.607 | 0.135 | 0.135 |
Figure 1Screenshots of four of the five software tabs. (A) Search tab (green tab), (B) disease analysis (blue tab), (C) database (orange tab), and (D) disease information (red tab).
Figure 2Schematic representation for describing the values assignment process: value 1 means match, and value 0 means no match. In this specific example, there are six correspondences and two no correspondences.
Epidemiological parameters and other significant data of the three agents. (A) Early epidemiological parameters available for the three outbreak tested [48–50]. (B) The specific epidemiological parameters available, based on mathematical modelling of the three infectious diseases considered [51–55]. A 95% confidence interval for all the detailed numeric parameters has been considered
| (A) | Geographical distribution | China | Madagascar | Democratic Republic of the Congo |
| Signs and symptoms | High fever | Fever, nausea | High fever, haemorrhage | |
| Vector/Other way | // | // | // | |
| Age group | // | All | All | |
| Gender | Male, female | Male, female | Male, female | |
| Transmission routes | Person-to-person | // | Body fluids | |
| Transmission routes more information | Droplets, contact | Flea bites | // | |
| Reservoir | Human | Rodents | // | |
| (B) | CFR (%) | 0.17 (17) | 0.09 (9) | 0.54 (54) |
| Transmission rate (day−1) | 0.75 | 0.45 | 0.2 | |
| Incubation rate (day−1) | 0.083 | 0.26 | 0.17 | |
| Recovery rate (day−1) | 0.125 | 0.26 | 0.1 | |
| Infectious mortality rate (day−1) | 0.006 | 0.34 | 0.133 | |
Figure 3Outputs of the “Search” tab. In section “Possible agent recognized”, after the initial epidemiological parameters have been filled in, is possible to identify each time the highest accuracy ratio (%): SARS-associated coronavirus (A), Yersinia pestis (B), and Ebola virus (C).
Figure 4Schematic representation of the comparison of the highest accuracy ratios. It is obtained comparing the IDS outcomes of the three outbreaks analysed and it distinguishes the more probable agents within the others: (A) the more probable agent is SARS (blue), (B) the more probable agent is Y. pestis (orange), and (C) the more probable agent is Ebola virus.
Figure 5The “Disease analysis” tab. It shows the comparison between the database (red spots) and the disease data (blue spots), respectively, of SARS (A), Plague (B), and EVD (C). The fixed standard deviation (SD) of blue spots is 0.05 (5%).
Figure 6Parameters correspondence. Schematic representation of the correspondence for each of the five parameters (CFR, transmission rate, incubation rate, recovery rate, and mortality rate) between the data from the database and the real cases considered (SARS in blue, Plague in red, and EVD in green).
| Ebola virus | Ebola Hemorrhagic Fever (EHF) |
| Yellow fever virus | Yellow fever |
| SARS-associated Coronavirus (SARS-CoV) | Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) |
| Variola major | Smallpox |
| Polio virus | Poliomyelitis |
| Marburg virus | Viral Hemorrhagic Fever (VHF) |
| Nipah virus | Nipah virus infection |
| Hendra virus | Hendra virus infection |
| Zika virus | Zika virus infection |
| Lassa Virus (LASV) | Lassa Hemorrhagic Fever (LHF) |
| Rift valley virus | Rift Valley Fever (RVF) |
| Dengue virus | Dengue fever |
| West nile virus | West Nile Disease (WND) |
| Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) | Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) |
| Avian (bird) influenza (flu) type A virus | Influenza |
| Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) | Infectious mononucleosis |
| Lymphocytic Choriomeningitis Virus (LCMV) | Lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus infection |
| Chikungunya virus | Chikungunya fever |
| Eastern Equine Encephalitis Virus (EEEV) | Eastern Equine Encephalitis (EEE) |
| Western Equine Encephalitis Virus (WEEV) | Western Equine Encephalitis (WEE) |
| Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis Virus (VEEV) | Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis or Encephalomyelitis (VEE) |
| Hepatitis A virus (HAV) | Hepatitis A, liver disease |
| Hepatitis B virus (HBV) | Hepatitis B, liver disease |
| Hepatitis C virus (HCV) | Hepatitis C, liver disease |
| Varicella-zoster virus (VZV) | Chickenpox or varicella |
| Legionellosis, Pontiac fever | |
| Plague | |
| Q fever | |
| Tuberculosis (TB) | |
| Tularemia | |
| Leprosy, Hansen’s disease | |
| Salmonella Typhi | Typhi fever |
| Leptospirosis | |
| Listeriosis | |
| Bacterial meningitis |