| Literature DB >> 35719644 |
Clarisse Lins de Lima1, Ana Clara Gomes da Silva1, Giselle Machado Magalhães Moreno2, Cecilia Cordeiro da Silva3, Anwar Musah4, Aisha Aldosery4, Livia Dutra2, Tercio Ambrizzi2, Iuri V G Borges2, Merve Tunali5, Selma Basibuyuk5, Orhan Yenigün5, Tiago Lima Massoni6, Ella Browning7, Kate Jones7, Luiza Campos8, Patty Kostkova4, Abel Guilhermino da Silva Filho3, Wellington Pinheiro Dos Santos9.
Abstract
Arboviruses are a group of diseases that are transmitted by an arthropod vector. Since they are part of the Neglected Tropical Diseases that pose several public health challenges for countries around the world. The arboviruses' dynamics are governed by a combination of climatic, environmental, and human mobility factors. Arboviruses prediction models can be a support tool for decision-making by public health agents. In this study, we propose a systematic literature review to identify arboviruses prediction models, as well as models for their transmitter vector dynamics. To carry out this review, we searched reputable scientific bases such as IEE Xplore, PubMed, Science Direct, Springer Link, and Scopus. We search for studies published between the years 2015 and 2020, using a search string. A total of 429 articles were returned, however, after filtering by exclusion and inclusion criteria, 139 were included. Through this systematic review, it was possible to identify the challenges present in the construction of arboviruses prediction models, as well as the existing gap in the construction of spatiotemporal models.Entities:
Keywords: Zika virus; arboviruses forecast; chikungunya; computational intelligence; dengue; digital epidemiology; machine learning; systematic review
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35719644 PMCID: PMC9204152 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.900077
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Figure 1This system consisted of the following steps: (1) First, we performed a search of scientific databases (IEEE Xplore, PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, and Springer Link). (2) We then filtered the returned articles according to the exclusion criteria. (3) In the next step, we selected the article that remained from the previous stage according to the inclusion criteria. (4) After completing the previous step, we read, evaluated, and summarized the studies included in the review. (5) In the last step of this review, we grouped the studies considering their common characteristics.
Quality criteria used to evaluate the selected studies.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| QC1 | Are the objectives clearly stated? | Y/P/N |
| QC2 | Are the data sources clearly described? | Y/P/N |
| QC3 | Do the authors present the variables to build their models? | Y/P/N |
| QC4 | Do the author explicitly defined which computational techniques or prediction model they used as well as their architectures and parameters? | Y/P/N |
| QC5 | Do the authors report which metrics they used in order to evaluate their models? | Y/P/N |
| QC6 | Are the conclusions coherent to the study findings and also with the set objectives? | Y/P/N |
| QC7 | Do the authors detail the weakness of their work? | Y/P/N |
Number of studies per group, considering the following stratification: Group 1: prediction of arboviruses by counting; Group 2: detection of arboviruses; Group 3: prediction of risk and epidemiological outbreaks of arboviruses; Group 4: modeling the dynamics of mosquitoes and breeding sites; Group 5: spatio-temporal modeling; Group 6: other approaches.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Arboviruses (count) prediction | 80 |
| Group 2 | Arboviruses detection | 15 |
| Group 3 | Arboviruses Outbreaks and Risk prediction | 18 |
| Group 4 | Models of mosquitoes dynamics, breeding sites models | 10 |
| Group 5 | Clustering, spatiotemporal modeling | 9 |
| Group 6 | Other approaches | 7 |
Figure 2Distribution of the number of articles according to the year of publication for each group.
Figure 3Average score for each quality criteria for the studies from each group.