Data-driven methods for dengue prediction and surveillance using real-world and Big Data: A systematic review.
Background Traditionally, dengue surveillance is based on case reporting to a central health agency. However, the delay between a case and its notification can limit the system responsiveness. Machine learning methods have been developed to reduce the reporting delays and to predict outbreaks, based...
| Published in: | PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2022
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0010056 https://doaj.org/article/c4179604254f45cebddb05ba0962bdc7 |
| Summary: | Background Traditionally, dengue surveillance is based on case reporting to a central health agency. However, the delay between a case and its notification can limit the system responsiveness. Machine learning methods have been developed to reduce the reporting delays and to predict outbreaks, based on non-traditional and non-clinical data sources. The aim of this systematic review was to identify studies that used real-world data, Big Data and/or machine learning methods to monitor and predict dengue-related outcomes. Methodology/principal findings We performed a search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and grey literature between January 1, 2000 and August 31, 2020. The review (ID: CRD42020172472) focused on data-driven studies. Reviews, randomized control trials and descriptive studies were not included. Among the 119 studies included, 67% were published between 2016 and 2020, and 39% used at least one novel data stream. The aim of the included studies was to predict a dengue-related outcome (55%), assess the validity of data sources for dengue surveillance (23%), or both (22%). Most studies (60%) used a machine learning approach. Studies on dengue prediction compared different prediction models, or identified significant predictors among several covariates in a model. The most significant predictors were rainfall (43%), temperature (41%), and humidity (25%). The two models with the highest performances were Neural Networks and Decision Trees (52%), followed by Support Vector Machine (17%). We cannot rule out a selection bias in our study because of our two main limitations: we did not include preprints and could not obtain the opinion of other international experts. Conclusions/significance Combining real-world data and Big Data with machine learning methods is a promising approach to improve dengue prediction and monitoring. Future studies should focus on how to better integrate all available data sources and methods to improve the response and dengue management by stakeholders. |
|---|