Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease Risk Prediction in Southern China: Time Series Study Integrating Web-Based Search and Epidemiological Surveillance Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD) is a global health concern requiring a risk assessment framework based on systematic factors analysis for prevention and control. Objective: This study aims to construct a comprehensive HFMD risk assessment framework by integrating multisource data, including historical incidence information, environmental parameters, and web-based search behavior data, to improve predictive performance. Methods: We integrated multisource data (HFMD cases, meteorology, air pollution, Baidu Index, and public health measures) from Bao'an District of Shenzhen city in Southern China (2014-2023). Correlation analysis was used to assess the associations between HFMD incidence and systematic factors. The impacts of environmental factors were analyzed using the Distributed Lag Nonlinear Model. Seasonal Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average model and advanced machine learning methods were used to predict HFMD 1-4 weeks ahead. Risk levels for the 1- to 4-week-ahead forecasts were determined by comparing the predicted weekly incidence against predefined thresholds. Results: From 2014 to 2023, Bao'an District reported a total of 118,826 cases of HFMD. Environmental and search behavior factors (excluding sulfur dioxide) were significantly associated with HFMD incidence in nonlinear patterns. For 1-week-ahead prediction, Seasonal Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average using case data alone performed best (R²=0.95, r=0.98, mean absolute error=53.34, and root-mean-square error=99.31). For 2- to 4-week-ahead forecasting, machine learning models incorporating web-based and environmental data showed superior performance (R²=0.83, 0.75, and 0.64; r=0.92, 0.87, and 0.80; mean absolute error=87.84, 112.41, and 132.47; and root-mean-square error=185.08, 229.13, and 276.81). The predicted HFMD risk levels matched the observed levels with accuracies of 96%, 87%, 88%, and 83%, respectively. Conclusions: The epidemic dynamics of HFMD are influenced by multiple factors in a nonlinear manner. Integrating multisource data, particularly web-based search behavior, significantly enhances the accuracy of short- and midterm forecasts and risk assessment. This approach offers practical insights for developing digital surveillance and early warning systems in public health.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".