-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2019Larviciding refers to the regular application of chemical or microbial insecticides to water bodies or water containers to kill the aquatic immature forms of the...
BACKGROUND
Larviciding refers to the regular application of chemical or microbial insecticides to water bodies or water containers to kill the aquatic immature forms of the mosquito (the larvae and pupae).
OBJECTIVES
To summarize research evidence evaluating whether larviciding with chemical or microbial insecticides prevents malaria transmission.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CAB Abstracts; LILACS; the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP); ClinicalTrials.gov; and the ISRCTN registry up to 6 June 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs), interrupted time series (ITS), randomized cross-over studies, non-randomized cross-over studies, and controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) that compared larviciding with no larviciding.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently assessed trials for eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Four studies (one cRCT, two CBAs, and one non-randomized cross-over design) met the inclusion criteria. All used ground application of larvicides (people hand-delivering larvicides); one evaluated chemical and three evaluated microbial agents. Studies were carried out in The Gambia, Tanzania, Kenya, and Sri Lanka. Three studies were conducted in areas where mosquito aquatic habitats were less extensive (< 1 km²), and one where habitats were more extensive (> 1 km²; a cross-over study from The Gambia).For aquatic habitats of less than 1 km², one cRCT randomized eight villages in Sri Lanka to evaluate chemical larviciding using insect growth regulator; and two CBA studies undertaken in Kenya and Tanzania evaluated microbial larvicides. In the cRCT, larviciding across all villages was associated with lower malaria incidence (rate ratio 0.24, 4649 participants, low-certainty evidence) and parasite prevalence (risk ratio (RR) 0.26, 5897 participants, low-certainty evidence) compared to no larviciding. The two CBA studies reported lower malaria prevalence during the intervention period (parasite prevalence RR 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 0.89; 70,902 participants; low-certainty evidence). The Kenyan study also reported a reduction in the incidence of new malaria cases (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.01; 720 participants; very low-certainty evidence).For aquatic habitats of more than 1 km², the non-randomized cross-over trial using microbial larvicides did not detect an effect for malaria incidence (RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.65; 4226 participants), or parasite prevalence (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.41 to 3.20; 3547 participants); both were very low-certainty evidence. The Gambia trial also reported the mean haemoglobin level, and there was no difference across the four comparisons (mean difference -0.13, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.13; 3586 participants).We were unable to summarize or pool entomological outcomes due to unreported and missing data.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Most controlled studies on larviciding have been performed with microbial agents. Ground larviciding for non-extensive larval habitats may have an effect on malaria transmission, and we do not know if there is an effect in large-scale aquatic habitats. We found no studies using larviciding application techniques that could cover large aquatic habitats, such as aerial spraying using aircraft.
Topics: Animals; Culicidae; Disease Reservoirs; Ecosystem; Humans; Insecticides; Interrupted Time Series Analysis; Larva; Malaria; Mosquito Control; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31425624
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012736.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2020Asthma is a common long-term respiratory disease affecting approximately 300 million people worldwide. Approximately half of people with asthma have an important... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Asthma is a common long-term respiratory disease affecting approximately 300 million people worldwide. Approximately half of people with asthma have an important allergic component to their disease, which may provide an opportunity for targeted treatment. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) aims to reduce asthma symptoms by delivering increasing doses of an allergen (e.g. house dust mite, pollen extract) under the tongue to induce immune tolerance. Fifty-two studies were identified and synthesised in the original Cochrane Review in 2015, but questions remained about the safety and efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy for people with asthma.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy compared with placebo or standard care for adults and children with asthma.
SEARCH METHODS
The original searches for trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR), ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and reference lists of all primary studies and review articles found trials up to 25 March 2015. The most recent search for trials for the current update was conducted on 29 October 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included parallel randomised controlled trials, irrespective of blinding or duration, that evaluated sublingual immunotherapy versus placebo or as an add-on to standard asthma management. We included both adults and children with asthma of any severity and with any allergen-sensitisation pattern. We included studies that recruited participants with asthma, rhinitis, or both, providing at least 80% of trial participants had a diagnosis of asthma. We selected outcomes to reflect recommended outcomes for asthma clinical trials and those most important to people with asthma. Primary outcomes were asthma exacerbations requiring a visit to the emergency department (ED) or admission to hospital, validated measures of quality of life, and all-cause serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes were asthma symptom scores, exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, response to provocation tests, and dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the search results for included trials, extracted numerical data, and assessed risk of bias, all of which were cross-checked for accuracy. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) or risk differences (RDs) using study participants as the unit of analysis; we analysed continuous data as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) using random-effects models. We considered the strength of evidence for all primary and secondary outcomes using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Sixty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for this update, including 52 studies from the original review. Most studies were double-blind and placebo-controlled, varied in duration from one day to three years, and recruited participants with mild or intermittent asthma, often with comorbid allergic rhinitis. Twenty-three studies recruited adults and teenagers; 31 recruited only children; three recruited both; and nine did not specify. The pattern of reporting and results remained largely unchanged from the original review despite 14 further studies and a 50% increase in participants studied (5077 to 7944). Reporting of primary efficacy outcomes to measure the impact of SLIT on asthma exacerbations and quality of life was infrequent, and selective reporting may have had a serious effect on the completeness of the evidence; 16 studies did not contribute any data, and a further six studies could only be included in a post hoc analysis of all adverse events. Allocation procedures were generally not well described; about a quarter of the studies were at high risk of performance or detection bias (or both); and participant attrition was high or unknown in around half of the studies. The primary outcome in most studies did not align with those of interest to the review (mostly asthma or rhinitis symptoms), and only two small studies reported our primary outcome of exacerbations requiring an ED or hospital visit; the pooled estimate from these studies suggests SLIT may reduce exacerbations compared with placebo or usual care, but the evidence is very uncertain (OR 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 1.20; n = 108; very low-certainty evidence). Nine studies reporting quality of life could not be combined in a meta-analysis and, whilst the direction of effect mostly favoured SLIT, the effects were often uncertain and small. SLIT likely does not increase SAEs compared with placebo or usual care, and analysis by risk difference suggests no more than 1 in 100 people taking SLIT will have a serious adverse event (RD -0.0004, 95% CI -0.0072 to 0.0064; participants = 4810; studies = 29; moderate-certainty evidence). Regarding secondary outcomes, asthma symptom and medication scores were mostly measured with non-validated scales, which precluded meaningful meta-analysis or interpretation, but there was a general trend of SLIT benefit over placebo. Changes in ICS use (MD -17.13 µg/d, 95% CI -61.19 to 26.93; low-certainty evidence), exacerbations requiring oral steroids (studies = 2; no events), and bronchial provocation (SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.82; low-certainty evidence) were not often reported. Results were imprecise and included the possibility of important benefit or little effect and, in some cases, potential harm from SLIT. More people taking SLIT had adverse events of any kind compared with control (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.67; high-certainty evidence; participants = 4251; studies = 27), but events were usually reported to be transient and mild. Lack of data prevented most of the planned subgroup and sensitivity analyses.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite continued study in the field, the evidence for important outcomes such as exacerbations and quality of life remains too limited to draw clinically useful conclusions about the efficacy of SLIT for people with asthma. Trials mostly recruited mixed populations with mild and intermittent asthma and/or rhinitis and focused on non-validated symptom and medication scores. The review findings suggest that SLIT may be a safe option for people with well-controlled mild-to-moderate asthma and rhinitis who are likely to be at low risk of serious harm, but the role of SLIT for people with uncontrolled asthma requires further evaluation.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Animals; Asthma; Child; Disease Progression; Hospitalization; Humans; Placebos; Pollen; Pyroglyphidae; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinitis, Allergic; Sublingual Immunotherapy
PubMed: 32926419
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011293.pub3 -
Environmental Science and Pollution... Apr 2021There are many studies that provide information regarding ticks infesting humans. However, there is no a meta-analysis about the global ranks of tick infestation rates... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
There are many studies that provide information regarding ticks infesting humans. However, there is no a meta-analysis about the global ranks of tick infestation rates and records, global monthly tick bites and annually and periodically trends of tick infestation rates, and the global tick infestation rates among years, mounts, regions, and countries. The study provides new insights about the above objectives in a global context and therefore performed. After a preliminary review of the 610 papers representing objective areas, 241 were selected for detailed meta-analysis. In general, the global ranks of tick species were, respectively, between 0.01-85.4% and 1-53 for human infestation rates and records. Twenty-six and sixteen tick species have more than 10% and 10 records of human tick infestation rates and records, respectively. It seems these tick species tend to be more blood-feeding on humans and as a result can be more dangerous to humans. The outcome of study demonstrated that there is no difference between seasonal human tick infestation patterns in the northern and southern hemispheres. The most global monthly mean tick bites in humans were observed in June then followed in July, August, May, and September. The global annually and periodically trends of tick infestation rates in humans exhibited decreasing trends over the past decades suggesting the preventive measure to prohibit human tick infestation have been successful. It seems that the ranks of tick infestation rates and records in humans may be as two indexes to illustrate the degree of importance of tick infesting humans.
Topics: Animals; Goals; Humans; Seasons; Tick Infestations; Ticks
PubMed: 33641105
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-13102-6 -
Journal of Ethnopharmacology Jan 2023African traditional medicine is one of the oldest and most diverse practices for treating ailments and numerous natural products have been recommended for gastric ulcer... (Review)
Review
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE
African traditional medicine is one of the oldest and most diverse practices for treating ailments and numerous natural products have been recommended for gastric ulcer treatment. Helicobacter pylori is the main causative organism implicated in several diseases, most notably in causing inflammation and the onset of gastric ulcers. Current H. pylori treatment methods are losing efficacy as H. pylori rapidly gains resistance to antibiotics. Hence, a search into natural products and their historical traditional efficacy for the treatment of gastric ulcers is of interest.
AIM OF THE STUDY
This review aimed to summarise the African use of natural products, including medicinal plants noted in ethnobotanical reviews, used traditionally to treat gastric ulcers, and highlights the investigations into the anti-H. pylori activity of medicinal plants and bee products found in Africa.
METHODOLOGY
A systematic review was carried out to identify natural products, including those used traditionally in Africa to treat gastric ulcers, and to correlate this with scientific investigations into the anti-H. pylori activity of natural products used in Africa.
RESULTS
A total of 107 literature sources describing the traditional use of medicinal plants in gastric ulcer treatment were found, from which 360 medicinal plants were identified. Of the plants used traditionally for gastric ulcer treatment, 11% were investigated either in vitro or in vivo for anti-ulcer and anti-H. pylori activity. Of the 122 medicinal plants eliciting antimicrobial or anti-ulcer activity, Hibiscus sabdariffa L. calyx extract and Terminalia macroptera Guill. & Perr. root extract were found to have the most noteworthy antimicrobial activity, with minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of 0.01 mg/mL and 0.03 mg/mL respectively. The essential oils of Piper longum L. and Pachira aquatica Aubl. displayed the most notable in vitro anti-H. pylori activity (MIC of 0.01 mg/mL and 0.02 mg/mL). Several in vivo studies found medicinal plant extracts effective in reducing the H. pylori load along the gastric mucosa. The South African honey variants, Pure Honey and Champagne Royal Train (common names given by supplier) were the most antimicrobially effective (MIC of 0.01-10.0%, 0.63-10.00% v/v) in inhibiting H. pylori when assessed in vitro.
CONCLUSION
These results highlight the potential of natural products to inhibit H. pylori growth and serve as a possible stepping-stone in understanding the management of ulcers. Furthermore, effective natural product treatment or prophylactic use for preventing H. pylori growth may provide a more affordable option for African populations.
Topics: Bees; Animals; Helicobacter pylori; Stomach Ulcer; Biological Products; Plant Extracts; Plants, Medicinal; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Infective Agents; Helicobacter Infections
PubMed: 36174808
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2022.115698 -
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection... 2023A number of mosquito-borne viruses (MBVs), such as dengue virus (DENV), zika virus (ZIKV), chikungunya (CHIKV), West Nile virus (WNV), and yellow fever virus (YFV) exert... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
A number of mosquito-borne viruses (MBVs), such as dengue virus (DENV), zika virus (ZIKV), chikungunya (CHIKV), West Nile virus (WNV), and yellow fever virus (YFV) exert adverse health impacts on the global population. and are the prime vectors responsible for the transmission of these viruses. The viruses have acquired a number of routes for successful transmission, including horizontal and vertical transmission. Transovarial transmission is a subset/type of vertical transmission adopted by mosquitoes for the transmission of viruses from females to their offspring through eggs/ovaries. It provides a mechanism for these MBVs to persist and maintain their lineage during adverse climatic conditions of extremely hot and cold temperatures, during the dry season, or in the absence of susceptible vertebrate host when horizontal transmission is not possible.
METHODS
The publications discussed in this systematic review were searched for using the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, and websites such as those of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, using the search terms "transovarial transmission" and "mosquito-borne viruses" from 16 May 2023 to 20 September 2023.
RESULTS
A total of 2,391 articles were searched, of which 123 were chosen for full text evaluation, and 60 were then included in the study after screening and removing duplicates.
CONCLUSION
The present systematic review focuses on understanding the above diseases, their pathogenesis, epidemiology and host-parasite interactions. The factors affecting transovarial transmission, potential implications, mosquito antiviral defense mechanism, and the control strategies for these mosquito-borne viral diseases (MBVDs) are also be included in this review.
Topics: Animals; Female; Humans; Aedes; Mosquito Vectors; Mosquito-Borne Diseases
PubMed: 38235494
DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2023.1304938 -
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases Apr 2021As the three major arthropod-borne viruses, dengue virus (DENV), chikungunya virus (CHIKV), and zika virus (ZIKV) are posing a growing threat to global public health and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
As the three major arthropod-borne viruses, dengue virus (DENV), chikungunya virus (CHIKV), and zika virus (ZIKV) are posing a growing threat to global public health and socioeconomic development. Our study aimed to systematically review the global seroprevalences of these arboviruses from existing publications.
METHODS
Articles published between Jan 01, 2000 and Dec 31, 2019 in the databases of Embase, Pubmed and Web of Science were searched and collected. Countries or areas with known local presence of Aedes vector mosquitoes were included. Random effects model was utilized to estimate the pooled seroprevalences and the proportion of inapparent infection.
RESULTS
Out of 1375, a total of 133 articles involving 176,001 subjects were included for our analysis. The pooled seroprevalences of DENV, CHIKV and ZIKV were 38%, 25% and 18%, respectively; and their corresponding proportions of inapparent infections were 80%, 40% and 50%. The South-East Asia Region had the highest seroprevalences of DENV and CHIKV, while the Region of the Americas had the highest seroprevalence of ZIKV. The seroprevalences of DENV and CHIKV were similar when comparing developed and developing countries, urban and rural areas, or among different populations. In addition, we observed a decreased global seroprevalences in the new decade (2010-2019) comparing to the decade before (2000-2009) for CHIKV. For ZIKV, the positive rates tested with the nucleic acid detection method were lower than those tested with the antibody detection method. Lastly, numerous cases of dual seropositivity for CHIKV and DENV were reported.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results revealed a varied prevalence of arbovirus infections in different geographical regions and countries, and the inapparent infection accounted an unneglected portion of infections that requires more attention. This study will shed lights on our understanding of the true burden of arbovirus infections and promote appropriate vaccination in the future.
Topics: Aedes; Animals; Chikungunya Fever; Chikungunya virus; Dengue; Dengue Virus; Global Health; Humans; Mosquito Vectors; Seroepidemiologic Studies; Zika Virus; Zika Virus Infection
PubMed: 33909610
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009337 -
The Science of the Total Environment Oct 2022Multiple stressors threaten bee health, a major one being pesticides. Bees are simultaneously exposed to multiple pesticides that can cause both lethal and sublethal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Multiple stressors threaten bee health, a major one being pesticides. Bees are simultaneously exposed to multiple pesticides that can cause both lethal and sublethal effects. Risk assessment and most research on bee health, however, focus on lethal individual effects. Here, we performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis that summarizes and re-interprets the available qualitative and quantitative information on the lethal, sublethal, and combined toxicity of a comprehensive range of pesticides on bees. We provide results (1970-2019) for multiple bee species (Bombus, Osmia, Megachile, Melipona, Partamona, Scaptotrigona), although most works focused on Apis mellifera L. (78 %). Our harmonised results document the lethal toxicity of pesticides in bees (n = 377 pesticides) and the types of sublethal testing methods and related effects that cause a sublethal effect (n = 375 sublethal experiments). We identified the most common combinations of pesticides and mode of actions tested, and summarize the experimental methods, magnitude of the interactions, and robustness of available data (n = 361 experiments). We provide open access searchable, comprehensive, and integrated list of pesticides and their levels causing lethal, sublethal, and combined effects. We report major data gaps related to pesticide's sublethal (71 %) and combined (e.g., ~99 %) toxicity. We identified pesticides and mode of actions of greatest concern in terms of sublethal (chlorothalonil, pymetrozine, glyphosate; neonicotinoids) and combined (tau-fluvalinate combinations; acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and neonicotinoids) effects. Although certain pesticides have faced regulatory restrictions in specific countries (chlorothalonil, pymetrozine, neonicotinoids), most are still widely used worldwide (e.g., glyphosate). This work aims at facilitating the implementation of more comprehensive and harmonised research and risk assessments, considering sublethal and combined effects. To ensure safeguarding pollinators and the environment, we advocate for a more refined and holistic assessment that do not only focus on lethality but uses harmonised methods to test sublethal and relevant combinations.
Topics: Acetylcholinesterase; Animals; Bees; Insecticides; Neonicotinoids; Pesticides; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 35760183
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156857 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2024Dengue is a global health problem of high significance, with 3.9 billion people at risk of infection. The geographic expansion of dengue virus (DENV) infection has... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dengue is a global health problem of high significance, with 3.9 billion people at risk of infection. The geographic expansion of dengue virus (DENV) infection has resulted in increased frequency and severity of the disease, and the number of deaths has increased in recent years. Wolbachia,an intracellular bacterial endosymbiont, has been under investigation for several years as a novel dengue-control strategy. Some dengue vectors (Aedes mosquitoes) can be transinfected with specific strains of Wolbachia, which decreases their fitness (ability to survive and mate) and their ability to reproduce, inhibiting the replication of dengue. Both laboratory and field studies have demonstrated the potential effect of Wolbachia deployments on reducing dengue transmission, and modelling studies have suggested that this may be a self-sustaining strategy for dengue prevention, although long-term effects are yet to be elucidated.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy of Wolbachia-carrying Aedes speciesdeployments (specifically wMel-, wMelPop-, and wAlbB- strains of Wolbachia) for preventing dengue virus infection.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, and two trial registries up to 24 January 2024.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs), conducted in dengue endemic or epidemic-prone settings were eligible. We sought studies that investigated the impact of Wolbachia-carrying Aedes deployments on epidemiological or entomological dengue-related outcomes, utilizing either the population replacement or population suppression strategy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. We used odds ratios (OR) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) as the effect measure for dichotomous outcomes. For count/rate outcomes, we planned to use the rate ratio with 95% CI as the effect measure. We used adjusted measures of effect for cRCTs. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
One completed cRCT met our inclusion criteria, and we identified two further ongoing cRCTs. The included trial was conducted in an urban setting in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. It utilized a nested test-negative study design, whereby all participants aged three to 45 years who presented at healthcare centres with a fever were enrolled in the study provided they had resided in the study area for the previous 10 nights. The trial showed that wMel-Wolbachia infected Ae aegypti deployments probably reduce the odds of contracting virologically confirmed dengue by 77% (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.35; 1 trial, 6306 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The cluster-level prevalence of wMel Wolbachia-carrying mosquitoes remained high over two years in the intervention arm of the trial, reported as 95.8% (interquartile range 91.5 to 97.8) across 27 months in clusters receiving wMel-Wolbachia Ae aegypti deployments, but there were no reliable comparative data for this outcome. Other primary outcomes were the incidence of virologically confirmed dengue, the prevalence of dengue ribonucleic acid in the mosquito population, and mosquito density, but there were no data for these outcomes. Additionally, there were no data on adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The included trial demonstrates the potential significant impact of wMel-Wolbachia-carrying Ae aegypti mosquitoes on preventing dengue infection in an endemic setting, and supports evidence reported in non-randomized and uncontrolled studies. Further trials across a greater diversity of settings are required to confirm whether these findings apply to other locations and country settings, and greater reporting of acceptability and cost are important.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Aedes; Wolbachia; Dengue Virus; Mosquito Vectors; Dengue
PubMed: 38597256
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015636.pub2 -
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases Dec 2021Improving our understanding of Mayaro virus (MAYV) ecology is critical to guide surveillance and risk assessment. We conducted a PRISMA-adherent systematic review of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Improving our understanding of Mayaro virus (MAYV) ecology is critical to guide surveillance and risk assessment. We conducted a PRISMA-adherent systematic review of the published and grey literature to identify potential arthropod vectors and non-human animal reservoirs of MAYV. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, SciELO and grey-literature sources including PAHO databases and dissertation repositories. Studies were included if they assessed MAYV virological/immunological measured occurrence in field-caught, domestic, or sentinel animals or in field-caught arthropods. We conducted an animal seroprevalence meta-analysis using a random effects model. We compiled granular georeferenced maps of non-human MAYV occurrence and graded the quality of the studies using a customized framework. Overall, 57 studies were eligible out of 1523 screened, published between the years 1961 and 2020. Seventeen studies reported MAYV positivity in wild mammals, birds, or reptiles and five studies reported MAYV positivity in domestic animals. MAYV positivity was reported in 12 orders of wild-caught vertebrates, most frequently in the orders Charadriiformes and Primate. Sixteen studies detected MAYV in wild-caught mosquito genera including Haemagogus, Aedes, Culex, Psorophora, Coquillettidia, and Sabethes. Vertebrate animals or arthropods with MAYV were detected in Brazil, Panama, Peru, French Guiana, Colombia, Trinidad, Venezuela, Argentina, and Paraguay. Among non-human vertebrates, the Primate order had the highest pooled seroprevalence at 13.1% (95% CI: 4.3-25.1%). From the three most studied primate genera we found the highest seroprevalence was in Alouatta (32.2%, 95% CI: 0.0-79.2%), followed by Callithrix (17.8%, 95% CI: 8.6-28.5%), and Cebus/Sapajus (3.7%, 95% CI: 0.0-11.1%). We further found that MAYV occurs in a wide range of vectors beyond Haemagogus spp. The quality of evidence behind these findings was variable and prompts calls for standardization of reporting of arbovirus occurrence. These findings support further risk emergence prediction, guide field surveillance efforts, and prompt further in-vivo studies to better define the ecological drivers of MAYV maintenance and potential for emergence.
Topics: Alphavirus; Alphavirus Infections; Animals; Arthropod Vectors; Birds; Disease Reservoirs; Humans; Mammals; Mosquito Vectors; Primates; Reptiles
PubMed: 34898602
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0010016 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Oct 2023Aedes (Stegomyia)-borne diseases are an expanding global threat, but gaps in surveillance make comprehensive and comparable risk assessments challenging. Geostatistical...
BACKGROUND
Aedes (Stegomyia)-borne diseases are an expanding global threat, but gaps in surveillance make comprehensive and comparable risk assessments challenging. Geostatistical models combine data from multiple locations and use links with environmental and socioeconomic factors to make predictive risk maps. Here we systematically review past approaches to map risk for different Aedes-borne arboviruses from local to global scales, identifying differences and similarities in the data types, covariates, and modelling approaches used.
METHODS
We searched on-line databases for predictive risk mapping studies for dengue, Zika, chikungunya, and yellow fever with no geographical or date restrictions. We included studies that needed to parameterise or fit their model to real-world epidemiological data and make predictions to new spatial locations of some measure of population-level risk of viral transmission (e.g. incidence, occurrence, suitability, etc.).
RESULTS
We found a growing number of arbovirus risk mapping studies across all endemic regions and arboviral diseases, with a total of 176 papers published 2002-2022 with the largest increases shortly following major epidemics. Three dominant use cases emerged: (i) global maps to identify limits of transmission, estimate burden and assess impacts of future global change, (ii) regional models used to predict the spread of major epidemics between countries and (iii) national and sub-national models that use local datasets to better understand transmission dynamics to improve outbreak detection and response. Temperature and rainfall were the most popular choice of covariates (included in 50% and 40% of studies respectively) but variables such as human mobility are increasingly being included. Surprisingly, few studies (22%, 31/144) robustly tested combinations of covariates from different domains (e.g. climatic, sociodemographic, ecological, etc.) and only 49% of studies assessed predictive performance via out-of-sample validation procedures.
CONCLUSIONS
Here we show that approaches to map risk for different arboviruses have diversified in response to changing use cases, epidemiology and data availability. We identify key differences in mapping approaches between different arboviral diseases, discuss future research needs and outline specific recommendations for future arbovirus mapping.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Arboviruses; Aedes; Arbovirus Infections; Yellow Fever; Zika Virus Infection; Chikungunya Fever; Zika Virus; Mosquito Vectors; Dengue
PubMed: 37864153
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08717-8