Abstract
Dengue is among the fastest-spreading vector-borne infectious disease, with outbreaks often overwhelm the health system and result in huge morbidity and mortality in its endemic populations in the absence of an efficient warning system. A large number of prediction models are currently in use globally. As such, this study aimed to systematically review the published literature that used quantitative models to predict dengue outbreaks and provide insights about the current practices. A systematic search was undertaken, using the Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science databases for published citations, without time or geographical restrictions. Study selection, data extraction and management process were devised in accordance with the ‘Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies’ (‘CHARMS’) framework. A total of 78 models were included in the review from 51 studies. Most models sourced climate (89.7%) and climate change (82.4%) data from agency reports and only 59.0% of the models adjusted for reporting time lag. All included models used climate predictors; 65.4% of them were built with only climate factors. Climate factors were used in combination with climate change factors (10.3%), both climate change and demographic factors (10.3%), vector factors (5.1%), and demographic factors (5.1%). Machine learning techniques were used for 38.5% of the models. Of these, random forest (20.0%), neural networks (23.3%) and ensemble models (13.3%) were notable. Among the statistical (61.5%) models, linear regression (20.8%), Poisson regression (18.8%), generalized additive models (16.7%) and time series/autoregressive models (18.8%) were notable. Around 24.4% of the models reported no validation at all and only 6.4% reported external validation. The reporting of methodology and model performance measures were inadequate in many of the existing prediction models. This review collates plausible predictors and methodological approaches, which will contribute to robust modelling in diverse settings and populations.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.