Scoping review on vector-borne diseases in urban areas: transmission dynamics, vectorial capacity and co-infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transmission dynamics, vectorial capacity, and co-infections have substantial impacts on vector-borne diseases (VBDs) affecting urban and suburban populations. Reviewing key factors can provide insight into priority research areas and offer suggestions for potential interventions. MAIN BODY: Through a scoping review, we identify knowledge gaps on transmission dynamics, vectorial capacity, and co-infections regarding VBDs in urban areas. Peer-reviewed and grey literature published between 2000 and 2016 was searched. We screened abstracts and full texts to select studies. Using an extraction grid, we retrieved general data, results, lessons learned and recommendations, future research avenues, and practice implications. We classified studies by VBD and country/continent and identified relevant knowledge gaps. Of 773 articles selected for full-text screening, 50 were included in the review: 23 based on research in the Americas, 15 in Asia, 10 in Africa, and one each in Europe and Australia. The largest body of evidence concerning VBD epidemiology in urban areas concerned dengue and malaria. Other arboviruses covered included chikungunya and West Nile virus, other parasitic diseases such as leishmaniasis and trypanosomiasis, and bacterial rickettsiosis and plague. Most articles retrieved in our review combined transmission dynamics and vectorial capacity; only two combined transmission dynamics and co-infection. The review identified significant knowledge gaps on the role of asymptomatic individuals, the effects of co-infection and other host factors, and the impacts of climatic, environmental, and socioeconomic factors on VBD transmission in urban areas. Limitations included the trade-off from narrowing the search strategy (missing out on classical modelling studies), a lack of studies on co-infections, most studies being only descriptive, and few offering concrete public health recommendations. More research is needed on transmission risk in homes and workplaces, given increasingly dynamic and mobile populations. The lack of studies on co-infection hampers monitoring of infections transmitted by the same vector. CONCLUSIONS: Strengthening VBD surveillance and control, particularly in asymptomatic cases and mobile populations, as well as using early warning tools to predict increasing transmission, were key strategies identified for public health policy and practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".