» Articles » PMID: 34181645

How Public Reaction to Disease Information Across Scales and the Impacts of Vector Control Methods Influence Disease Prevalence and Control Efficacy

Overview
Specialty Biology
Date 2021 Jun 28
PMID 34181645
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

With the development of social media, the information about vector-borne disease incidence over broad spatial scales can cause demand for local vector control before local risk exists. Anticipatory intervention may still benefit local disease control efforts; however, infection risks are not the only focal concerns governing public demand for vector control. Concern for environmental contamination from pesticides and economic limitations on the frequency and magnitude of control measures also play key roles. Further, public concern may be focused more on ecological factors (i.e., controlling mosquito populations) or on epidemiological factors (i.e., controlling infection-carrying mosquitoes), which may lead to very different control outcomes. Here we introduced a generic Ross-MacDonald model, incorporating these factors under three spatial scales of disease information: local, regional, and global. We tailored and parameterized the model for Zika virus transmitted by Aedes aegypti mosquito. We found that sensitive reactivity caused by larger-scale incidence information could decrease average human infections per patch breeding capacity, however, the associated increase in total control effort plays a larger role, which leads to an overall decrease in control efficacy. The shift of focal concerns from epidemiological to ecological risk could relax the negative effect of the sensitive reactivity on control efficacy when mosquito breeding capacity populations are expected to be large. This work demonstrates that, depending on expected total mosquito breeding capacity population size, and weights of different focal concerns, large-scale disease information can reduce disease infections without lowering control efficacy. Our findings provide guidance for vector-control strategies by considering public reaction through social media.

Citing Articles

A New Paradigm for Pandemic Preparedness.

Fefferman N, McAlister J, Akpa B, Akwataghibe K, Azad F, Barkley K Curr Epidemiol Rep. 2024; 10(4):240-251.

PMID: 39055963 PMC: 11271254. DOI: 10.1007/s40471-023-00336-w.


A general modeling framework for exploring the impact of individual concern and personal protection on vector-borne disease dynamics.

Roosa K, Fefferman N Parasit Vectors. 2022; 15(1):361.

PMID: 36209182 PMC: 9548150. DOI: 10.1186/s13071-022-05481-7.

References
1.
Yakob L, Funk S, Camacho A, Brady O, Edmunds W . Aedes aegypti Control Through Modernized, Integrated Vector Management. PLoS Curr. 2017; 9. PMC: 5319873. DOI: 10.1371/currents.outbreaks.45deb8e03a438c4d088afb4fafae8747. View

2.
Schoch-Spana M, Watson C, Ravi S, Meyer D, Pechta L, Rose D . Vector control in Zika-affected communities: Local views on community engagement and public health ethics during outbreaks. Prev Med Rep. 2020; 18:101059. PMC: 7052511. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101059. View

3.
Suarez G, Udiani O, Allan B, Price C, Ryan S, Lofgren E . A generic arboviral model framework for exploring trade-offs between vector control and environmental concerns. J Theor Biol. 2020; 490:110161. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2020.110161. View

4.
Packierisamy P, Ng C, Dahlui M, Inbaraj J, Balan V, Halasa Y . Cost of Dengue Vector Control Activities in Malaysia. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2015; 93(5):1020-1027. PMC: 4703248. DOI: 10.4269/ajtmh.14-0667. View

5.
Walsh R, Facchinelli L, Ramsey J, Bond J, Gould F . Assessing the impact of density dependence in field populations of Aedes aegypti. J Vector Ecol. 2011; 36(2):300-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1948-7134.2011.00170.x. View