Spatio-temporal clusters and patterns of spread of dengue, chikungunya, and Zika in Colombia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colombia has one of the highest burdens of arboviruses in South America. The country was in a state of hyperendemicity between 2014 and 2016, with co-circulation of several Aedes-borne viruses, including a syndemic of dengue, chikungunya, and Zika in 2015. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We analyzed the cases of dengue, chikungunya, and Zika notified in Colombia from January 2014 to December 2018 by municipality and week. The trajectory and velocity of spread was studied using trend surface analysis, and spatio-temporal high-risk clusters for each disease in separate and for the three diseases simultaneously (multivariate) were identified using Kulldorff's scan statistics. During the study period, there were 366,628, 77,345 and 74,793 cases of dengue, chikungunya, and Zika, respectively, in Colombia. The spread patterns for chikungunya and Zika were similar, although Zika's spread was accelerated. Both chikungunya and Zika mainly spread from the regions on the Atlantic coast and the south-west to the rest of the country. We identified 21, 16, and 13 spatio-temporal clusters of dengue, chikungunya and Zika, respectively, and, from the multivariate analysis, 20 spatio-temporal clusters, among which 7 were simultaneous for the three diseases. For all disease-specific analyses and the multivariate analysis, the most-likely cluster was identified in the south-western region of Colombia, including the Valle del Cauca department. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The results further our understanding of emerging Aedes-borne diseases in Colombia by providing useful evidence on their potential site of entry and spread trajectory within the country, and identifying spatio-temporal disease-specific and multivariate high-risk clusters of dengue, chikungunya, and Zika, information that can be used to target interventions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".