Cargando…

Comparing field-collected versus remotely-sensed variables to model malaria risk in the highlands of western Uganda

BACKGROUND: Malaria risk is not uniform across relatively small geographic areas, such as within a village. This heterogeneity in risk is associated with factors including demographic characteristics, individual behaviours, home construction, and environmental conditions, the importance of which var...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hollingsworth, Brandon D., Sandborn, Hilary, Baguma, Emmanuel, Ayebare, Emmanuel, Ntaro, Moses, Mulogo, Edgar M., Boyce, Ross M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10294526/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37365595
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-023-04628-w
_version_ 1785063217761878016
author Hollingsworth, Brandon D.
Sandborn, Hilary
Baguma, Emmanuel
Ayebare, Emmanuel
Ntaro, Moses
Mulogo, Edgar M.
Boyce, Ross M.
author_facet Hollingsworth, Brandon D.
Sandborn, Hilary
Baguma, Emmanuel
Ayebare, Emmanuel
Ntaro, Moses
Mulogo, Edgar M.
Boyce, Ross M.
author_sort Hollingsworth, Brandon D.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Malaria risk is not uniform across relatively small geographic areas, such as within a village. This heterogeneity in risk is associated with factors including demographic characteristics, individual behaviours, home construction, and environmental conditions, the importance of which varies by setting, making prediction difficult. This study attempted to compare the ability of statistical models to predict malaria risk at the household level using either (i) free easily-obtained remotely-sensed data or (ii) results from a resource-intensive household survey. METHODS: The results of a household malaria survey conducted in 3 villages in western Uganda were combined with remotely-sensed environmental data to develop predictive models of two outcomes of interest (1) a positive ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic test (uRDT) and (2) inpatient admission for malaria within the last year. Generalized additive models were fit to each result using factors from the remotely-sensed data, the household survey, or a combination of both. Using a cross-validation approach, each model’s ability to predict malaria risk for out-of-sample households (OOS) and villages (OOV) was evaluated. RESULTS: Models fit using only environmental variables provided a better fit and higher OOS predictive power for uRDT result (AIC = 362, AUC = 0.736) and inpatient admission (AIC = 623, AUC = 0.672) compared to models using household variables (uRDT AIC = 376, Admission AIC = 644, uRDT AUC = 0.667, Admission AUC = 0.653). Combining the datasets did not result in a better fit or higher OOS predictive power for uRDT results (AIC = 367, AUC = 0.671), but did for inpatient admission (AIC = 615, AUC = 0.683). Household factors performed best when predicting OOV uRDT results (AUC = 0.596) and inpatient admission (AUC = 0.553), but not much better than a random classifier. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that residual malaria risk is driven more by the external environment than home construction within the study area, possibly due to transmission regularly occurring outside of the home. Additionally, they suggest that when predicting malaria risk the benefit may not outweigh the high costs of attaining detailed information on household predictors. Instead, using remotely-sensed data provides an equally effective, cost-efficient alternative. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12936-023-04628-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10294526
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102945262023-06-28 Comparing field-collected versus remotely-sensed variables to model malaria risk in the highlands of western Uganda Hollingsworth, Brandon D. Sandborn, Hilary Baguma, Emmanuel Ayebare, Emmanuel Ntaro, Moses Mulogo, Edgar M. Boyce, Ross M. Malar J Research BACKGROUND: Malaria risk is not uniform across relatively small geographic areas, such as within a village. This heterogeneity in risk is associated with factors including demographic characteristics, individual behaviours, home construction, and environmental conditions, the importance of which varies by setting, making prediction difficult. This study attempted to compare the ability of statistical models to predict malaria risk at the household level using either (i) free easily-obtained remotely-sensed data or (ii) results from a resource-intensive household survey. METHODS: The results of a household malaria survey conducted in 3 villages in western Uganda were combined with remotely-sensed environmental data to develop predictive models of two outcomes of interest (1) a positive ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic test (uRDT) and (2) inpatient admission for malaria within the last year. Generalized additive models were fit to each result using factors from the remotely-sensed data, the household survey, or a combination of both. Using a cross-validation approach, each model’s ability to predict malaria risk for out-of-sample households (OOS) and villages (OOV) was evaluated. RESULTS: Models fit using only environmental variables provided a better fit and higher OOS predictive power for uRDT result (AIC = 362, AUC = 0.736) and inpatient admission (AIC = 623, AUC = 0.672) compared to models using household variables (uRDT AIC = 376, Admission AIC = 644, uRDT AUC = 0.667, Admission AUC = 0.653). Combining the datasets did not result in a better fit or higher OOS predictive power for uRDT results (AIC = 367, AUC = 0.671), but did for inpatient admission (AIC = 615, AUC = 0.683). Household factors performed best when predicting OOV uRDT results (AUC = 0.596) and inpatient admission (AUC = 0.553), but not much better than a random classifier. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that residual malaria risk is driven more by the external environment than home construction within the study area, possibly due to transmission regularly occurring outside of the home. Additionally, they suggest that when predicting malaria risk the benefit may not outweigh the high costs of attaining detailed information on household predictors. Instead, using remotely-sensed data provides an equally effective, cost-efficient alternative. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12936-023-04628-w. BioMed Central 2023-06-26 /pmc/articles/PMC10294526/ /pubmed/37365595 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-023-04628-w Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Hollingsworth, Brandon D.
Sandborn, Hilary
Baguma, Emmanuel
Ayebare, Emmanuel
Ntaro, Moses
Mulogo, Edgar M.
Boyce, Ross M.
Comparing field-collected versus remotely-sensed variables to model malaria risk in the highlands of western Uganda
title Comparing field-collected versus remotely-sensed variables to model malaria risk in the highlands of western Uganda
title_full Comparing field-collected versus remotely-sensed variables to model malaria risk in the highlands of western Uganda
title_fullStr Comparing field-collected versus remotely-sensed variables to model malaria risk in the highlands of western Uganda
title_full_unstemmed Comparing field-collected versus remotely-sensed variables to model malaria risk in the highlands of western Uganda
title_short Comparing field-collected versus remotely-sensed variables to model malaria risk in the highlands of western Uganda
title_sort comparing field-collected versus remotely-sensed variables to model malaria risk in the highlands of western uganda
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10294526/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37365595
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-023-04628-w
work_keys_str_mv AT hollingsworthbrandond comparingfieldcollectedversusremotelysensedvariablestomodelmalariariskinthehighlandsofwesternuganda
AT sandbornhilary comparingfieldcollectedversusremotelysensedvariablestomodelmalariariskinthehighlandsofwesternuganda
AT bagumaemmanuel comparingfieldcollectedversusremotelysensedvariablestomodelmalariariskinthehighlandsofwesternuganda
AT ayebareemmanuel comparingfieldcollectedversusremotelysensedvariablestomodelmalariariskinthehighlandsofwesternuganda
AT ntaromoses comparingfieldcollectedversusremotelysensedvariablestomodelmalariariskinthehighlandsofwesternuganda
AT mulogoedgarm comparingfieldcollectedversusremotelysensedvariablestomodelmalariariskinthehighlandsofwesternuganda
AT boycerossm comparingfieldcollectedversusremotelysensedvariablestomodelmalariariskinthehighlandsofwesternuganda