Modelling the transmission of dengue, zika and chikungunya: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: mosquitoes are the primary vectors for the spread of viruses like dengue (DENV), zika (ZIKV) and chikungunya (CHIKV), all of which affect humans. Those diseases contribute to global public health issues because of their great dispersion in rural and urban areas. Mathematical and statistical models have become helpful in understanding these diseases' epidemiological dynamics. However, modelling the complexity of a real phenomenon, such as a viral disease, should consider several factors. This scoping review aims to document, identify and classify the most important factors as well as the modelling strategies for the spread of DENV, ZIKV and CHIKV. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct searches in electronic bibliographic databases such as PubMed, MathSciNet and the Web of Science for full-text peer-reviewed articles written in English, French and Spanish. These articles should use mathematical and statistical modelling frameworks to study dengue, zika and chikungunya, and their cocirculation/coinfection with other diseases, with a publication date between 1 January 2011 and 31 July 2023. Eligible studies should employ deterministic, stochastic or statistical modelling approaches, consider control measures and incorporate parameters' estimation or considering calibration/validation approaches. We will exclude articles focusing on clinical/laboratory experiments or theoretical articles that do not include any case study. Two reviewers specialised in zoonotic diseases and mathematical/statistical modelling will independently screen and retain relevant studies. Data extraction will be performed using a structured form, and the findings of the study will be summarised through classification and descriptive analysis. Three scoping reviews will be published, each focusing on one disease and its cocirculation/co-infection with other diseases. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol is exempt from ethics approval because it is carried out on published manuscripts and without the participation of humans and/or animals. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations in conferences.
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 | 0.069 | 0.081 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.012 |
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".