SynthesisPLoS neglected tropical diseases2026
Modelling approaches for predicting the distribution of skin NTDs: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSkin neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) such as cutaneous leishmaniasis, lymphatic filariasis, mycetoma, and podoconiosis affect millions in endemic regions, but are under-recorded despite causing significant burdens. Predictive modelling has been used to estimate the distribution and prevalence of some of these diseases, and predictions may be useful for identifying at-risk populations and guiding interventions. This review synthesises the literature on modelling approaches to predict skin NTD distributions, aiming to identify prevalent methodologies, evaluate their strengths and limitations, highlight research gaps, and provide recommendations for enhancing their utility.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review from three databases and included studies published from 2000-2024. Studies were included if they employed statistical models or machine learning algorithms to predict the distribution of skin NTDs. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts. Data extracted included disease, study region, source of epidemiological data, model types and predictors.
resultsFrom 2,870 retrieved records, 68 met the inclusion criteria. The most modelled skin NTDs were cutaneous leishmaniasis (n = 26) and lymphatic filariasis (n = 18). Geostatistical modelling was the most common approach, followed by ecological niche modelling, with MaxEnt and generalised linear models constituting the predominant model types. Common environmental covariates included climate, land cover and land use, elevation, and soil data. The types of epidemiological data varied, with many studies relying on passive surveillance and pseudoabsence data. The risk of bias was high among ecological niche models.
conclusionsEnvironmental and geostatistical models can inform targeted interventions for skin NTDs, aiding efficient resource allocation and public health planning. However, data limitations, especially the absence of true absence data, underreporting and variations in surveillance sensitivity, can reduce model accuracy and undermine decision-makers' confidence. Future studies should focus on incorporating information about case identification into modelling frameworks, including a broader spectrum of environmental and socio-economic determinants, and ensuring validation across diverse geographic regions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.