Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32312266›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health geographics2020

Distance sampling for epidemiology: an interactive tool for estimating under-reporting of cases from clinic data.

Luca Nelli, Moussa Guelbeogo, Heather M Ferguson, Daouda Ouattara, Alfred Tiono, Sagnon N'Fale, Jason Matthiopoulos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health geographics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Luca NelliUniversity of Glasgow, Institute of Biodiversity Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, Glasgow, UK. luca.nelli@glasgow.ac.uk.
Moussa GuelbeogoCentre National De Recherche et Formation sur le Paludisme, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Heather M FergusonUniversity of Glasgow, Institute of Biodiversity Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, Glasgow, UK.
Daouda OuattaraCentre National De Recherche et Formation sur le Paludisme, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Alfred TionoCentre National De Recherche et Formation sur le Paludisme, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Sagnon N'FaleCentre National De Recherche et Formation sur le Paludisme, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Jason MatthiopoulosUniversity of Glasgow, Institute of Biodiversity Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 200222/Z/15/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDistance sampling methods are widely used in ecology to estimate and map the abundance of animal and plant populations from spatial survey data. The key underlying concept in distance sampling is the detection function, the probability of detecting the occurrence of an event as a function of its distance from the observer, as well as other covariates that may influence detection. In epidemiology, the burden and distribution of infectious disease is often inferred from cases that are reported at clinics and hospitals. In areas with few public health facilities and low accessibility, the probability of detecting a case is also a function of the distance between an infected person and the "observer" (e.g. a health centre). While the problem of distance-related under-reporting is acknowledged in public health; there are few quantitative methods for assessing and correcting for this bias when mapping disease incidence. Here, we develop a modified version of distance sampling for prediction of infectious disease incidence by relaxing some of the framework's fundamental assumptions. We illustrate the utility of this approach using as our example malaria distribution in rural Burkina Faso, where there is a large population at risk but relatively low accessibility of health facilities.

resultsThe modified distance-sampling framework was used to predict the probability of reporting malaria infection at 8 rural clinics, based on road-travel distances from villages. The rate at which reporting probability dropped with distance varied between clinics, depending on road and clinic positions. The probability of case detection was estimated as 0.3-1 in the immediate vicinity of the clinic, dropping to 0.1-0.6 at a travel distance of 10 km, and effectively zero at distances > 30-40 km.

conclusionsTo enhance the method's strategic impact, we provide an interactive mapping tool (as a self-contained R Shiny app) that can be used by non-specialists to interrogate model outputs and visualize how the overall probability of under-reporting and the catchment area of each clinic is influenced by changing the number and spatial allocation of health centres.

Indexed as

Epidemiologic StudiesHealth Services AccessibilityInfectionsRural PopulationBurkina FasoForecastingHealth FacilitiesHumansIncidenceMalariaTravelAccess to health careDistance samplingMalariaPassive surveillanceReporting bias

Identifiers

PMID32312266
PMCPMC7171748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.