摘要
Malaria is still the major parasitic disease in the world, with approximately 438,000 deaths in 2015. Environmental risk factors (ERF) have been widely studied, however, there are discrepancies in the results about their influence on malaria transmission. Recently, papers have been published about geospatial analysis of ERF of malaria to explain why malaria varies from place to place. Our primary objective was to identify the environmental variables most used in the geospatial analysis of malaria transmission. The secondary objective was to identify the geo-analytic methods and techniques, as well as geo-analytic statistics commonly related to ERF and malaria. We conducted a systematized review of articles published from January 2004 to March 2015, within Web of Science, Pubmed and LILACS databases. Initially 676 articles were found, after inclusion and exclusion criteria, 29 manuscripts were selected. Temperature, land use and land cover, surface moisture and vector breeding site were the most frequent included variables. As for geo-analytic methods, geostatistical models with Bayesian framework were the most applied. Kriging interpolations, Geographical Weighted Regression as well as Kulldorff’s spatial scan were the techniques more widely used. The main objective of many of these studies was to use these methods and techniques to create malaria risk maps. Spatial analysis performed with satellite images and georeferenced data are increasing in relevance due to the use of remote sensing and Geographic Information System. The combination of these new technologies identifies ERF more accurately, and the use of Bayesian geostatistical models allows a wide diffusion of malaria risk maps. It is known that temperature, humidity vegetation and vector breeding site play a critical role in malaria transmission;however, other environmental risk factors have also been identified. Risk maps have a tremendous potential to enhance the effectiveness of malaria-control programs.
Malaria is still the major parasitic disease in the world, with approximately 438,000 deaths in 2015. Environmental risk factors (ERF) have been widely studied, however, there are discrepancies in the results about their influence on malaria transmission. Recently, papers have been published about geospatial analysis of ERF of malaria to explain why malaria varies from place to place. Our primary objective was to identify the environmental variables most used in the geospatial analysis of malaria transmission. The secondary objective was to identify the geo-analytic methods and techniques, as well as geo-analytic statistics commonly related to ERF and malaria. We conducted a systematized review of articles published from January 2004 to March 2015, within Web of Science, Pubmed and LILACS databases. Initially 676 articles were found, after inclusion and exclusion criteria, 29 manuscripts were selected. Temperature, land use and land cover, surface moisture and vector breeding site were the most frequent included variables. As for geo-analytic methods, geostatistical models with Bayesian framework were the most applied. Kriging interpolations, Geographical Weighted Regression as well as Kulldorff’s spatial scan were the techniques more widely used. The main objective of many of these studies was to use these methods and techniques to create malaria risk maps. Spatial analysis performed with satellite images and georeferenced data are increasing in relevance due to the use of remote sensing and Geographic Information System. The combination of these new technologies identifies ERF more accurately, and the use of Bayesian geostatistical models allows a wide diffusion of malaria risk maps. It is known that temperature, humidity vegetation and vector breeding site play a critical role in malaria transmission;however, other environmental risk factors have also been identified. Risk maps have a tremendous potential to enhance the effectiveness of malaria-control programs.
作者
Tiago Canelas
Carlos Castillo-Salgado
Helena Ribeiro
Tiago Canelas;Carlos Castillo-Salgado;Helena Ribeiro(School of Public Health, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil;Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, US;Global Public Health Observatory, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, US)
