4.0 Article

Quantifying the relationship between human Lyme disease and Borrelia burgdorferi exposure in domestic dogs

期刊

GEOSPATIAL HEALTH
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 111-120

出版社

UNIV NAPLES FEDERICO II
DOI: 10.4081/gh.2019.750

关键词

Lyme disease; Canine sentinel; Borrelia burgdorferi; USA

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [DMS 1407480]
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01 AI121351]
  3. Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica-CAPC Infectious Disease Postdoctoral Fellowship
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [R01AI121351] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lyme disease (LD) is the most common vector-borne disease in the United States. Early confirmatory diagnosis remains a challenge, while the disease can be debilitating if left untreated. Further, the decision to test is complicated by under-reporting, low positive predictive values of testing in non-endemic areas and travel, which together exacerbate the difficulty in identification of newly endemic areas or areas of emerging concern. Spatio-temporal analyses at the national scale are critical to establishing a baseline human LD risk assessment tool that would allow for the detection of changes in these areas. A well-established surrogate for human LD incidence is canine LD seroprevalence, making it a strong candidate covariate for use in such analyses. In this paper, Bayesian statistical methods were used to fit a spatio-temporal spline regression model to estimate the relationship between human LD incidence and canine seroprevalence, treating the latter as an explanatory covariate. A strong non-linear monotonically increasing association was found. That is, this analysis suggests that mean incidence in humans increases with canine seroprevalence until the seroprevalence in dogs reaches approximately 30%. This finding reinforces the use of canines as sentinels for human LD risk, especially with respect to identifying geographic areas of concern for potential human exposure.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据