4.7 Article

Malaria risk assessment and mapping using satellite imagery and boosted regression trees in the Peruvian Amazon

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-51564-4

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Peruvian National Council of Science - CONCYTEC [008-2014-FONDECYT]
  2. Academie de Recherche et d'Enseignement Superieur - Commission de la Cooperation au Developpement of Belgium (ARES-CCD, PRD-Peru 2014-2019)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This is the first study to assess the risk of co-endemic Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum transmission in the Peruvian Amazon using boosted regression tree (BRT) models based on social and environmental predictors derived from satellite imagery and data.Yearly cross-validated BRT models were created to discriminate high-risk (annual parasite index API > 10 cases/1000 people) and very-high-risk for malaria (API > 50 cases/1000 people) in 2766 georeferenced villages of Loreto department, between 2010-2017 as other parts in the article (graphs, tables, and texts). Predictors were cumulative annual rainfall, forest coverage, annual forest loss, annual mean land surface temperature, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), normalized difference water index (NDWI), shortest distance to rivers, time to populated villages, and population density. BRT models built with predictor data of a given year efficiently discriminated the malaria risk for that year in villages (area under the ROC curve (AUC) > 0.80), and most models also effectively predicted malaria risk in the following year. Cumulative rainfall, population density and time to populated villages were consistently the top three predictors for both P. vivax and P. falciparum incidence. Maps created using the BRT models characterize the spatial distribution of the malaria incidence in Loreto and should contribute to malaria-related decision making in the area.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available