a comparison of two mathematical models of the impact of mass drug administration on the transmission and control of schistosomiasis
Clicks: 276
ID: 186828
2017
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
30.0
/100
276 views
42 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #43 of 69 articles by views in Communications biology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The predictions of two mathematical models describing the transmission dynamics of schistosome infection and the impact of mass drug administration are compared. The models differ in their description of the dynamics of the parasites within the host population and in their representation of the stages of the parasite lifecycle outside of the host. Key parameters are estimated from data collected in northern Mozambique from 2011 to 2015. This type of data set is valuable for model validation as treatment prior to the study was minimal. Predictions from both models are compared with each other and with epidemiological observations. Both models have difficulty matching both the intensity and prevalence of disease in the datasets and are only partially successful at predicting the impact of treatment. The models also differ from each other in their predictions, both quantitatively and qualitatively, of the long-term impact of 10 years’ school-based mass drug administration. We trace the dynamical differences back to basic assumptions about worm aggregation, force of infection and the dynamics of the parasite in the snail population in the two models and suggest data which could discriminate between them. We also discuss limitations with the datasets used and ways in which data collection could be improved.
| Reference Key |
truscott2017epidemicsa
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;J.E. Truscott;D. Gurarie;R. Alsallaq;J. Toor;N. Yoon;S.H. Farrell;H.C. Turner;A.E. Phillips;H.O. Aurelio;J. Ferro;C.H. King;R.M. Anderson |
| Journal | Communications biology |
| Year | 2017 |
| DOI |
10.1016/j.epidem.2017.02.003
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.