High-risk spatiotemporal patterns of cutaneous leishmaniasis: a nationwide study in Iran from 2011 to 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is a wide-reaching infection of major public health concern. Iran is one of the six most endemic countries in the world. This study aims to provide a spatiotemporal visualization of CL cases in Iran at the county level from 2011 to 2020, detecting high-risk zones, while also noting the movement of high-risk clusters. METHODS: On the basis of clinical observations and parasitological tests, data of 154,378 diagnosed patients were obtained from the Iran Ministry of Health and Medical Education. Utilizing spatial scan statistics, we investigated the disease's purely temporal, purely spatial, spatial variation in temporal trends and spatiotemporal patterns. At P = 0.05 level, the null hypothesis was rejected in every instance. RESULTS: In general, the number of new CL cases decreased over the course of the 9-year research period. From 2011 to 2020, a regular seasonal pattern, with peaks in the fall and troughs in the spring, was found. The period of September-February of 2014-2015 was found to hold the highest risk in terms of CL incidence rate in the whole country [relative risk (RR) = 2.24, P < 0.001)]. In terms of location, six significant high-risk CL clusters covering 40.6% of the total area of the country were observed, with the RR ranging from 1.87 to 9.69. In addition, spatial variation in the temporal trend analysis found 11 clusters as potential high-risk areas that highlighted certain regions with an increasing tendency. Finally, five space-time clusters were found. The geographical displacement and spread of the disease followed a moving pattern over the 9-year study period affecting many regions of the country. CONCLUSIONS: Our study has revealed significant regional, temporal, and spatiotemporal patterns of CL distribution in Iran. Over the years, there have been multiple shifts in spatiotemporal clusters, encompassing many different parts of the country from 2011 to 2020. The results reveal the formation of clusters across counties that cover certain parts of provinces, indicating the importance of conducting spatiotemporal analyses at the county level for studies that encompass entire countries. Such analyses, at a finer geographical scale, such as county level, might provide more precise results than analyses at the scale of the province.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".