Limits...
Mapping the receptivity of malaria risk to plan the future of control in Somalia.

Noor AM, Alegana VA, Patil AP, Moloney G, Borle M, Yusuf F, Amran J, Snow RW - BMJ Open (2012)

Bottom Line: Of these, 23% of the districts, home to 13% of the population, were under transmission of <1% PfPR(2-10).About 58% of the districts and 55% of the population were in the risk class of 1% to <5% PfPR(2-10).In contrast, the receptivity map estimated 65% of the districts and 69% of the population were under mesoendemic transmission (>10%-50% PfPR(2-10)) and the rest as hypoendemic.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Malaria Public Health and Epidemiology Group, Centre for Geographic Medicine Research-Coast, Kenya Medical Research Institute/Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To measure the receptive risks of malaria in Somalia and compare decisions on intervention scale-up based on this map and the more widely used contemporary risk maps.

Design: Cross-sectional community Plasmodium falciparum parasite rate (PfPR) data for the period 2007-2010 corrected to a standard age range of 2 to <10 years (PfPR(2-10)) and used within a Bayesian space-time geostatistical framework to predict the contemporary (2010) mean PfPR(2-10) and the maximum annual mean PfPR(2-10) (receptive) from the highest predicted PfPR(2-10) value over the study period as an estimate of receptivity.

Setting: Randomly sampled communities in Somalia.

Participants: Randomly sampled individuals of all ages.

Main outcome measure: Cartographic descriptions of malaria receptivity and contemporary risks in Somalia at the district level.

Results: The contemporary annual PfPR(2-10) map estimated that all districts (n=74) and population (n=8.4 million) in Somalia were under hypoendemic transmission (≤10% PfPR(2-10)). Of these, 23% of the districts, home to 13% of the population, were under transmission of <1% PfPR(2-10). About 58% of the districts and 55% of the population were in the risk class of 1% to <5% PfPR(2-10). In contrast, the receptivity map estimated 65% of the districts and 69% of the population were under mesoendemic transmission (>10%-50% PfPR(2-10)) and the rest as hypoendemic.

Conclusion: Compared with maps of receptive risks, contemporary maps of transmission mask disparities of malaria risk necessary to prioritise and sustain future control. As malaria risk declines across Africa, efforts must be invested in measuring receptivity for efficient control planning.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

District (n=74) maps of Somalia classified by endemicity using apopulation-weighted: (A) posterior aggregate annual meanPfPR2–10 (contemporary) prediction to2010 and (B) the maximum annual meanPfPR2–10 (receptive) predictions over theperiod 2007–2010. The blues lines show the location of the Juba (lower)and Shabelle (upper) Rivers.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4400533&req=5

fig3: District (n=74) maps of Somalia classified by endemicity using apopulation-weighted: (A) posterior aggregate annual meanPfPR2–10 (contemporary) prediction to2010 and (B) the maximum annual meanPfPR2–10 (receptive) predictions over theperiod 2007–2010. The blues lines show the location of the Juba (lower)and Shabelle (upper) Rivers.

Mentions: According to the contemporary district malaria endemicity map based on the annualmean PfPR2–10 map of 2010, all districts inSomalia were under hypoendemic transmission (figure3A). Of the 74 districts, an estimated 17 (23%) districts covering about1.1 million people (13%) were in the <1%PfPR2–10 risk class (table 1 and figure 3A).The majority of the districts (58%) and population (55%) were in the risk class of1%–<5% PfPR2–10 and the rest wereunder risks of 5%–10% PfPR2–10.


Mapping the receptivity of malaria risk to plan the future of control in Somalia.

Noor AM, Alegana VA, Patil AP, Moloney G, Borle M, Yusuf F, Amran J, Snow RW - BMJ Open (2012)

District (n=74) maps of Somalia classified by endemicity using apopulation-weighted: (A) posterior aggregate annual meanPfPR2–10 (contemporary) prediction to2010 and (B) the maximum annual meanPfPR2–10 (receptive) predictions over theperiod 2007–2010. The blues lines show the location of the Juba (lower)and Shabelle (upper) Rivers.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4400533&req=5

fig3: District (n=74) maps of Somalia classified by endemicity using apopulation-weighted: (A) posterior aggregate annual meanPfPR2–10 (contemporary) prediction to2010 and (B) the maximum annual meanPfPR2–10 (receptive) predictions over theperiod 2007–2010. The blues lines show the location of the Juba (lower)and Shabelle (upper) Rivers.
Mentions: According to the contemporary district malaria endemicity map based on the annualmean PfPR2–10 map of 2010, all districts inSomalia were under hypoendemic transmission (figure3A). Of the 74 districts, an estimated 17 (23%) districts covering about1.1 million people (13%) were in the <1%PfPR2–10 risk class (table 1 and figure 3A).The majority of the districts (58%) and population (55%) were in the risk class of1%–<5% PfPR2–10 and the rest wereunder risks of 5%–10% PfPR2–10.

Bottom Line: Of these, 23% of the districts, home to 13% of the population, were under transmission of <1% PfPR(2-10).About 58% of the districts and 55% of the population were in the risk class of 1% to <5% PfPR(2-10).In contrast, the receptivity map estimated 65% of the districts and 69% of the population were under mesoendemic transmission (>10%-50% PfPR(2-10)) and the rest as hypoendemic.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Malaria Public Health and Epidemiology Group, Centre for Geographic Medicine Research-Coast, Kenya Medical Research Institute/Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To measure the receptive risks of malaria in Somalia and compare decisions on intervention scale-up based on this map and the more widely used contemporary risk maps.

Design: Cross-sectional community Plasmodium falciparum parasite rate (PfPR) data for the period 2007-2010 corrected to a standard age range of 2 to <10 years (PfPR(2-10)) and used within a Bayesian space-time geostatistical framework to predict the contemporary (2010) mean PfPR(2-10) and the maximum annual mean PfPR(2-10) (receptive) from the highest predicted PfPR(2-10) value over the study period as an estimate of receptivity.

Setting: Randomly sampled communities in Somalia.

Participants: Randomly sampled individuals of all ages.

Main outcome measure: Cartographic descriptions of malaria receptivity and contemporary risks in Somalia at the district level.

Results: The contemporary annual PfPR(2-10) map estimated that all districts (n=74) and population (n=8.4 million) in Somalia were under hypoendemic transmission (≤10% PfPR(2-10)). Of these, 23% of the districts, home to 13% of the population, were under transmission of <1% PfPR(2-10). About 58% of the districts and 55% of the population were in the risk class of 1% to <5% PfPR(2-10). In contrast, the receptivity map estimated 65% of the districts and 69% of the population were under mesoendemic transmission (>10%-50% PfPR(2-10)) and the rest as hypoendemic.

Conclusion: Compared with maps of receptive risks, contemporary maps of transmission mask disparities of malaria risk necessary to prioritise and sustain future control. As malaria risk declines across Africa, efforts must be invested in measuring receptivity for efficient control planning.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus