...
首页> 外文期刊>International journal of infectious diseases : >Simulating a Transmission Assessment Survey: An evaluation of current methods used in determining the elimination of the neglected tropical disease, Lymphatic Filariasis
【24h】

Simulating a Transmission Assessment Survey: An evaluation of current methods used in determining the elimination of the neglected tropical disease, Lymphatic Filariasis

机译:模拟传输评估调查:对确定消除被忽略的热带病,淋巴丝虫病的当前方法的评估

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Introduction The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends Transmission Assessment Surveys (TAS) to determine when an evaluation unit (EU) (a designated population survey area) has achieved elimination of transmission of the vector-borne macroparasitic disease Lymphatic Filariasis (LF). These determinations are based on combining data from multiple survey units within an EU; it is unclear how underlying cluster-level variation influences the outcome of the TAS at EU level. We simulate LF infection distribution in an EU and compare three methods for assessing whether LF elimination has occurred based on currently recommended decision thresholds and sampling methods. Methods We simulate an EU divided into clusters of varying size and disease prevalence. We produce 1000 samples according to LF TAS examples and WHO guidelines and compare three decision-making approaches: lot quality assurance sampling (LQAS) (recommended by WHO), one-sided interval estimate (CI), and n th order statistic (MAX). Summary statistics demonstrating the “pass” rate for the EU under different disease transmission conditions are generated using a versatile SAS? macro. Results As the prevalence of LF decreases, the LQAS and CI approaches produce increased likelihood of a pass outcome for an EU while some cluster units may still have a high likelihood of transmission. The MAX provides an alternative that increases the likelihood of determining a pass only once the whole area has a low likelihood of transmission. LQAS and CI approaches designed to estimate the LF prevalence in the EU miss hotspots that will continue to transmit infection while the MAX approach focuses on identifying clusters with high risk of transmission. Conclusions The current TAS methodology has a flaw that may result in false predictions of LF transmission interruption throughout an EU. Modifying the TAS methodology to address results from extreme clusters rather than being based on mean prevalence over an EU will result in greater success for global elimination of LF.
机译:介绍世界卫生组织(世卫组织)建议传输评估调查(TA)确定评估单位(欧盟)(欧盟)(指定的人口调查区)是否已经取消了载体传播的宏观疾病淋巴丝体(LF)的传播。这些确定基于组合来自欧盟内的多调查单位的数据;目前尚不清楚底层级别变化如何影响欧盟水平的TAS的结果。我们在欧盟中模拟LF感染分布,并比较三种方法来评估是否已根据当前推荐的决策阈值和采样方法进行了消除。方法模拟欧盟分为不同大小和疾病患病率的簇。我们根据LF TAS示例和世卫组织指导和比较三种决策方法:批量质量保证采样(LQAS)(由世卫组织推荐),单面间隔估计(CI)和第n个订单统计数据(MAX)的指南和谁。摘要统计,使用通用的SAS生成不同疾病传输条件下欧盟的“通行证”率?宏。结果随着LF降低的普及,LQAS和CI方法产生了欧盟通信结果的增加的可能性,而一些簇单元仍可能具有很高的传输可能性。 MAX提供了一种替代方案,其仅增加一旦整个区域具有低的传输可能性而确定通过的可能性。 LQAS和CI方法旨在估算欧盟未命中热点的LF流行率,该热点将继续传输感染,而MAX方法侧重于识别具有高风险风险的群集。结论目前的TAS方法有一个缺陷,可能导致在整个欧盟的LF传输中断的假预测。修改TAS方法以解决极端群集的结果,而不是基于欧盟的平均流行,将导致全球消除LF的成功。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号