Methods to Estimate the Between-Population Level Effective Reproductive Number for Infectious Disease Epidemics: Foot-And-Mouth Disease (FMD) in Vietnam
Umanga Gunasekera, Kimberly VanderWaal, Jonathan Arzt, Andres Perez
{"title":"Methods to Estimate the Between-Population Level Effective Reproductive Number for Infectious Disease Epidemics: Foot-And-Mouth Disease (FMD) in Vietnam","authors":"Umanga Gunasekera, Kimberly VanderWaal, Jonathan Arzt, Andres Perez","doi":"10.1155/2024/4114217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p>Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), which is endemic in 77% of countries globally, is a major threat to the global livestock industry. Knowledge of the reproductive number at the population level (i.e., farm level, herd level, or above) for FMD is important to estimate the magnitude of epidemics and design and implement effective control methods. Different methods, based on disparate assumptions and limitations, have been used interchangeably to compute and report reproductive numbers at the population level without a formal comparison between them. This study compares the results obtained when using alternative methods to compute between populations (<i>R</i><sub>bp</sub>) for FMD using one single dataset collected over 10 years (2007–2017) at the commune-level swine farms in Vietnam. Seven spatial–temporal clusters were identified in the country, and the value of <i>R</i><sub>bp</sub> was computed on each of them using different analytical approaches, namely, epidemic doubling time, nearest neighbor, time-dependent reproductive number (TDR), sequential Bayesian (SB), and birth–death skyline (BDSKY) analysis in Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees 2 (BEAST2). Estimated <i>R</i><sub>bp</sub> values were relatively similar across methods ranging from 1.25 to 1.61. For the first time, the results here provide a comparison of different methods used to compute <i>R</i><sub>bp</sub> for FMD. Despite differences in assumptions and limitations, results suggest that different methods produce relatively similar outputs. Additionally, the results here provide foundational knowledge to support the evaluation and control of FMD epidemics in a population.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":234,"journal":{"name":"Transboundary and Emerging Diseases","volume":"2024 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/4114217","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transboundary and Emerging Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/4114217","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), which is endemic in 77% of countries globally, is a major threat to the global livestock industry. Knowledge of the reproductive number at the population level (i.e., farm level, herd level, or above) for FMD is important to estimate the magnitude of epidemics and design and implement effective control methods. Different methods, based on disparate assumptions and limitations, have been used interchangeably to compute and report reproductive numbers at the population level without a formal comparison between them. This study compares the results obtained when using alternative methods to compute between populations (Rbp) for FMD using one single dataset collected over 10 years (2007–2017) at the commune-level swine farms in Vietnam. Seven spatial–temporal clusters were identified in the country, and the value of Rbp was computed on each of them using different analytical approaches, namely, epidemic doubling time, nearest neighbor, time-dependent reproductive number (TDR), sequential Bayesian (SB), and birth–death skyline (BDSKY) analysis in Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees 2 (BEAST2). Estimated Rbp values were relatively similar across methods ranging from 1.25 to 1.61. For the first time, the results here provide a comparison of different methods used to compute Rbp for FMD. Despite differences in assumptions and limitations, results suggest that different methods produce relatively similar outputs. Additionally, the results here provide foundational knowledge to support the evaluation and control of FMD epidemics in a population.
期刊介绍:
Transboundary and Emerging Diseases brings together in one place the latest research on infectious diseases considered to hold the greatest economic threat to animals and humans worldwide. The journal provides a venue for global research on their diagnosis, prevention and management, and for papers on public health, pathogenesis, epidemiology, statistical modeling, diagnostics, biosecurity issues, genomics, vaccine development and rapid communication of new outbreaks. Papers should include timely research approaches using state-of-the-art technologies. The editors encourage papers adopting a science-based approach on socio-economic and environmental factors influencing the management of the bio-security threat posed by these diseases, including risk analysis and disease spread modeling. Preference will be given to communications focusing on novel science-based approaches to controlling transboundary and emerging diseases. The following topics are generally considered out-of-scope, but decisions are made on a case-by-case basis (for example, studies on cryptic wildlife populations, and those on potential species extinctions):
Pathogen discovery: a common pathogen newly recognised in a specific country, or a new pathogen or genetic sequence for which there is little context about — or insights regarding — its emergence or spread.
Prevalence estimation surveys and risk factor studies based on survey (rather than longitudinal) methodology, except when such studies are unique. Surveys of knowledge, attitudes and practices are within scope.
Diagnostic test development if not accompanied by robust sensitivity and specificity estimation from field studies.
Studies focused only on laboratory methods in which relevance to disease emergence and spread is not obvious or can not be inferred (“pure research” type studies).
Narrative literature reviews which do not generate new knowledge. Systematic and scoping reviews, and meta-analyses are within scope.