Incorporating social vulnerability in infectious disease mathematical modelling: a scoping review
BMC Medicine - 2024
Tóm tắt
Highlighted by the rise of COVID-19, climate change, and conflict, socially vulnerable populations are least resilient to disaster. In infectious disease management, mathematical models are a commonly used tool. Researchers should include social vulnerability in models to strengthen their utility in reflecting real-world dynamics. We conducted a scoping review to evaluate how researchers have incorporated social vulnerability into infectious disease mathematical models. The methodology followed the Joanna Briggs Institute and updated Arksey and O'Malley frameworks, verified by the PRISMA-ScR checklist. PubMed, Clarivate Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO Africa Wide Information, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for peer-reviewed published articles. Screening and extracting data were done by two independent researchers. Of 4075 results, 89 articles were identified. Two-thirds of articles used a compartmental model (n = 58, 65.2%), with a quarter using agent-based models (n = 24, 27.0%). Overall, routine indicators, namely age and sex, were among the most frequently used measures (n = 42, 12.3%; n = 22, 6.4%, respectively). Only one measure related to culture and social behaviour (0.3%). For compartmental models, researchers commonly constructed distinct models for each level of a social vulnerability measure and included new parameters or influenced standard parameters in model equations (n = 30, 51.7%). For all agent-based models, characteristics were assigned to hosts (n = 24, 100.0%), with most models including age, contact behaviour, and/or sex (n = 18, 75.0%; n = 14, 53.3%; n = 10, 41.7%, respectively). Given the importance of equitable and effective infectious disease management, there is potential to further the field. Our findings demonstrate that social vulnerability is not considered holistically. There is a focus on incorporating routine demographic indicators but important cultural and social behaviours that impact health outcomes are excluded. It is crucial to develop models that foreground social vulnerability to not only design more equitable interventions, but also to develop more effective infectious disease control and elimination strategies. Furthermore, this study revealed the lack of transparency around data sources, inconsistent reporting, lack of collaboration with local experts, and limited studies focused on modelling cultural indicators. These challenges are priorities for future research.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Hendriks SL, Montgomery H, Benton T, Badiane O, Castro de la Mata G, Fanzo J, Guinto RR, Soussana JF. Global environmental climate change, covid-19, and conflict threaten food security and nutrition. BMJ. 2022;378:e071534. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2022-071534
Gray A, Sharara F. Global and regional sepsis and infectious syndrome mortality in 2019: a systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2022;10(Special Issue). Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(22)00131-0
Neiderud CJ. How urbanization affects the epidemiology of emerging infectious diseases. Infect Ecol Epidemiol. 2015;5:27060. https://doi.org/10.3402/iee.v5.27060.
COVID-19 Excess Mortality Collaborators. Estimating excess mortality due to the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic analysis of COVID-19-related mortality, 2020–21. Lancet. 2022;399(10334):1513–1536. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02796-3
Bambra C. Pandemic inequalities: emerging infectious diseases and health equity. Int J Equity Health. 2022;21(6):1–4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01611-2.
Sierra M, Franco-Paredes C, Agudelo Higuita NI. Health inequities in the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ther Adv Infect Dis. 2023;10:20499361231162730. https://doi.org/10.1177/20499361231162726.
CDC SVI 2016 Documentation. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/placeandhealth/svi/documentation/pdf/SVI2016Documentation_01192022.pdf. 2020.
Cutter SL, Finch C. Temporal and spatial changes in social vulnerability to natural hazards. Environ Sci. 2008;105(7):2301–6. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0710375105.
Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2022: Changing Course. World Bank Group. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/b96b361a-a806-5567-8e8a-b14392e11fa0/content. 2022.
Kantamneni N. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on marginalized populations in the United States: A research agenda. J Vocat Behav. 2020;119: 103439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103439.
Li SL, Pereira RHM, Prete CA Jr, et al. Higher risk of death from COVID-19 in low-income and non-White populations of São Paulo. Brazil BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6: e004959. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-004959.
Mubangizi JC. Poor Lives Matter: COVID-19 and the Plight of Vulnerable Groups with Specific Reference to Poverty and Inequality in South Africa. J Afr Law. 2021;65(S2):237–58. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021855321000292.
Karaye IM, Horney JA. The Impact of Social Vulnerability on COVID-19 in the U.S.: An Analysis of Spatially Varying Relationships. Am J Prev Med. 2020;59(3):317–325. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2020.06.006
Nsagha DS, Atashili J, Fon PN, Tanue EA, Ayima CW, Kibu OD. Assessing the risk factors of cholera epidemic in the Buea Health District of Cameroon. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:1128. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2485-8.
Scheidell JD, Beau De Rochars VM, Séraphin MN, et al. Socioeconomic Vulnerability and Sexually Transmitted Infection Among Pregnant Haitian Women. Sex Transm Dis. 2018;45(9):626–631. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000861
Richards P, Amara J, Ferme MC, et al. Social Pathways for Ebola Virus Disease in Rural Sierra Leone, and Some Implications for Containment. PLOS Negl Trop Dis. 2015;9(4): e0003567. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0003567.
Thomas TL, Yarandi HN, Dalmida SG, Frados A, Klienert K. Cross-cultural differences and sexual risk behavior of emerging adults. J Transcult Nurs. 2015;26(1):64–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043659614524791.
United Nations International Labour Organisation. Global evidence on inequities in rural health protection: New data on rural deficits in health coverage for 174 countries. International Labour Office Social Protection Department. 2015.
McCallum H, Barlow N, Hone J. How should pathogen transmission be modelled? Trends Ecol Evol. 2001;16(6):295–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(01)02144-9.
Grassly N, Fraser C. Mathematical models of infectious disease transmission. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2008;6(6):477–87. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro1845.
Anderson RM, May RM. Infectious diseases of humans: dynamics and control. Oxford Univ Press. 1991. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.1840150131.
Brauer F. Compartmental Models in Epidemiology. In: Brauer F, van den Driessche P, Wu J, eds. Mathematical Epidemiology. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol 1945. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer; 2008:19–79. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78911-6_2
Luke DA, Stamatakis KA. Systems Science Methods in Public Health: Dynamics, Networks, and Agents. Annu Rev Public Health. 2012;33:357–76. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031210-101222.
Luke DA, Harris JK. Network analysis in public health: history, methods, and applications. Annu Rev Public Health. 2007;28:69–93. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.28.021406.144132.
Neumann JV, Burks AW. Theory of Self-Reproducing Automata. Champaign, IL, USA: University of Illinois Press; 1966.
White SH, Del Rey AM, Sánchez GR. Modeling epidemics using cellular automata. Appl Math Comput. 2007;186(1):193–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2006.06.126.
Abuelezam NN, Michel I, Marshall BD, Galea S. Accounting for historical injustices in mathematical models of infectious disease transmission: An analytic overview. Epidemics. 2023;43: 100679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epidem.2023.100679.
Williams TG, Brown DG, Guikema SD, et al. Integrating Equity Considerations into Agent-Based Modeling: A Conceptual Framework and Practical Guidance. J Artif Soc Soc Simul. 2022;25(3). Doi:https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.4816
Galanis G, Hanieh A. Incorporating Social Determinants of Health into Modelling of COVID-19 and other Infectious Diseases: A Baseline Socio-economic Compartmental Model. Soc Sci Med. 2021;274: 113794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113794.
Colquhoun HL, Levac D, O’Brien KK, Straus S, Tricco AC, Perrier L, Kastner M, Moher D. Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(12):1291–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.013.
Scoping Review Network Resources. Johanna Briggs Institute. https://jbi.global/scoping-review-network/resources
Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Method. 2005;8(1). Doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73. https://doi.org/10.7326/m18-0850.
Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:69. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69.
Hogan JW, Galai N, Davis WW. Modeling the Impact of Social Determinants of Health on HIV. AIDS Behav. 2021;25(Suppl 2):215–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-021-03399-2.
van Seventer JM, Hochberg NS. Principles of Infectious Diseases: Transmission, Diagnosis, Prevention, and Control. Int Encycl of Public Health. 2017;22–39. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-803678-5.00516-6
Thabane L, Mbuagbaw L, Zhang S, et al. A tutorial on sensitivity analyses in clinical trials: the what, why, when and how. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13:92. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-92.
World Bank Country and Lending Groups. The World Bank. https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups.
Durante R, Guiso L, Gulino G. Asocial capital: Civic culture and social distancing during COVID-19. J Public Econ. 2021;194: 104342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104342.
Grefenstette JJ, Brown ST, Rosenfeld R, et al. FRED (A Framework for Reconstructing Epidemic Dynamics): an open-source software system for modeling infectious diseases and control strategies using census-based populations. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):940. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13940.
Epstein JM, Parker J, Cummings D, Hammond RA. Coupled Contagion Dynamics of Fear and Disease: Mathematical and Computational Explorations. PLoS ONE. 2008;3(12): e3955. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003955.
How STDs Impact Women Differently from Men. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/factsheets/stds-women.pdf.
de Boer R, Musgrave J, Andersson N, Lutscher F. The importance of choice disability and structural intervention in the HIV epidemic in Sub-Saharan Africa. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(4): e0175297. https://doi.org/10.1371/journalpone.0175297.
Bayeh R, Yampolsky MA, Ryder AG. The Social Lives of Infectious Diseases: Why Culture Matters to COVID-19. Front Psychol. 2021;12: 648086. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.648086.
Cao C, Li L, Liu L. Do national cultures matter in the containment of COVID-19? Int J Sociol Soc Policy. 2020;40:939–61. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-07-2020-0334.
Barnes SL, Kasaie P, Anderson DJ, Rubin M. Research Methods in Healthcare Epidemiology and Antimicrobial Stewardship – Mathematical Modelling. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2016;37(11). Doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2016.160
UNAIDS Fact Sheet 2022. Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). https://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/UNAIDS_FactSheet_en.pdf. 2022.
Sweileh WM. Global research activity on mathematical modeling of transmission and control of 23 selected infectious disease outbreak. Global Health. 2022;18(4). Doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-022-00803-x
Van Calster B, McLernon DJ, van Smeden M, Wynants L, Steyerberg EW; Topic Group ‘Evaluating diagnostic tests and prediction models’ of the STRATOS initiative. Calibration: the Achilles heel of predictive analytics. BMC Med. 2019;17(1) 230. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1466-7
Kim D. Part II: Dynamic thinking tools. In: O’Reilly K (ed). Systems Thinking Tools: A User’s Reference Guide. Pegasus Communications, Inc., Waltham, MA, USA, 2000.