The Library

Disease prevention versus data privacy : using landcover maps to inform spatial epidemic models

Tools

Tildesley, Michael J. and Ryan, Sadie J.. (2012) Disease prevention versus data privacy : using landcover maps to inform spatial epidemic models. PLoS Computational Biology, Vol.8 (No.11). e1002723. ISSN 1553-7358

Preview

Text
WRAP_Tildesley_pcbi.1002723.pdf - Published Version
Download (1850Kb) | Preview

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002723

Abstract

The availability of epidemiological data in the early stages of an outbreak of an infectious disease is vital for modelers to make accurate predictions regarding the likely spread of disease and preferred intervention strategies. However, in some countries, the necessary demographic data are only available at an aggregate scale. We investigated the ability of models of livestock infectious diseases to predict epidemic spread and obtain optimal control policies in the event of imperfect, aggregated data. Taking a geographic information approach, we used land cover data to predict UK farm locations and investigated the influence of using these synthetic location data sets upon epidemiological predictions in the event of an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. When broadly classified land cover data were used to create synthetic farm locations, model predictions deviated significantly from those simulated on true data. However, when more resolved subclass land use data were used, moderate to highly accurate predictions of epidemic size, duration and optimal vaccination and ring culling strategies were obtained. This suggests that a geographic information approach may be useful where individual farm-level data are not available, to allow predictive analyses to be carried out regarding the likely spread of disease. This method can also be used for contingency planning in collaboration with policy makers to determine preferred control strategies in the event of a future outbreak of infectious disease in livestock.

Item Type:

Journal Article

Subjects:

S Agriculture > SF Animal culture

Divisions:

Faculty of Science > Centre for Complexity Science
Faculty of Science > Mathematics

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):

Communicable diseases -- Transmission -- Mathematical models, Land cover, Farms -- Data processing

Journal or Publication Title:

PLoS Computational Biology

Publisher:

Public Library of Science

ISSN:

1553-7358

Official Date:

2012

Dates:

Date	Event
2012	Published

Volume:

Vol.8

Number:

No.11

Page Range:

e1002723

Identification Number:

10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002723

Status:

Peer Reviewed

Publication Status:

Published

Access rights to Published version:

Restricted or Subscription Access

Funder:

National Science Foundation (U.S.) (NSF), United States. Dept. of Homeland Security, United States. Dept. of Agriculture, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, National Institutes of Health (U.S.) (NIH), University of California, Santa Barbara, California

Grant number:

EF-0832858 (NSF), ST-108-000017 (DHS), EF-0553768 (NSF)

References:

1. Anderson I (2002). Foot and Mouth Disease 2001: Lessons to be Learned
Enquiry. London: The Stationary Office.
2. Keeling MJ, Woolhouse MEJ, Shaw DJ, Matthews L, Chase-Topping ME, et al.
(2001). Dynamics of the 2001 UK foot and mouth epidemic: stochastic dispersal
in a heterogeneous landscape. Science 294: 813–817.
3. Ferguson NM, Donnelly CA, Anderson RM (2001a). Transmission intensity and
impact of control policies on the foot and mouth epidemic in Great Britain.
Nature 413: 542–548.
4. Tildesley MJ, Bessell PR, Keeling MJ, Woolhouse MEJ (2009). The role of preemptive
culling in the control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease. Proc Roy Soc B 276:
3239–3248.
5. Diggle PJ (2006). Spatio-temporal point processes, partial likelihood, foot and
mouth disease. Stat Methods Med Res 25: 325–336.
6. Bessell PR, Shaw DJ, Savill NJ, Woolhouse MEJ (2009). Statistical modeling of
holding level susceptibility to infection during the UK 2001 Foot and Mouth
Disease epidemic. Int J Infect Dis 14: E210–E215.
7. Deardon R, Brooks SP, Grenfell BT, Keeling MJ, Tildesley MJ et al. (2009).
Inference for individual-level models of infectious diseases in large populations.
Stat Sin 20: 239–261.
8. Keeling MJ, Woolhouse MEJ, May RM, Davies G, Grenfell BT (2003).
Modeling vaccination strategies against foot-and-mouth disease. Nature 421:
136–142.
9. Tildesley MJ, Savill NJ, Shaw DJ, Deardon R, Brooks SP, et al. (2006). Optimal
reactive vaccination strategies for a foot-and-mouth outbreak in Great Britain.
Nature 440: 83–86.
10. Tildesley MJ, Keeling MJ (2008). Modeling foot-and-mouth disease: A
comparison between the UK and Denmark. Prev Vet Med 85: 107–124.
11. Ferguson NM, Cummings DAT, Cauchemez S, Fraser C, Riley S, et al. (2005).
Strategies for containing an emerging influenza pandemic in Southeast Asia.
Nature 437: 209–214.
12. Gudelj I, White KAJ (2004). Spatial heterogeneity, social structure and disease
dynamics of animal populations. Theor Popul Biol 66: 139–149.
13. Swinton J, Harwood J, Grenfell BT, Gilligan CA (1998). Persistence thresholds
for phocine distemper virus infection in harbour seal Phoca vitulina
metapopulations. J An Ecol 67: 54–68.
14. Hugh-Jones ME (1972). Epidemiological studies on 1967–1968 Foot and Mouth
Epidemic - attack rates and cattle density. Res Vet Sci 13: 411–417.
15. Ferguson NM, Donnelly CA, Anderson RM (2001b). The foot-and-mouth
epidemic in Great Britain: pattern of spread and impact of interventions. Science
292: 1155–1160.
16. Taylor NM, Honhold N, Paterson AD, Mansley LM (2004). Risk of foot-andmouth
disease associated with proximity in space and time to infected premises
and the implications for control policy during the 2001 epidemic in Cumbria.
Vet Rec 154: 617–626.
17. Tildesley MJ, House TA, Bruhn MC, Curry RJ, O’Neil M et al. (2010). Impact
of spatial clustering on disease transmission and optimal control. Proc Natl Acad
Sci U S A 107: 1041–1046.
18. Dion E, VanSchalkwky L, Lambin EF (2010). The landscape epidemiology of
foot-and-mouth disease in South Africa: A spatially explicit multi-agent
simulation. Ecol Model 222: 2059–2072.
19. Lambin EF, Tran A, Vanwambeke SO, Linard C, Soti V (2010). Pathogenic
landscapes: interactions between land, people, disease vectors, and their animal
hosts. Int J Health Geogr 9: 54.
20. Ostfield RS, Glass GE, Keesing F (2005). Spatial epidemiology: an emerging (or
re-emerging) discipline. Trends Ecol Evol 20: 328–336.
21. Rogers DJ and Randolph SE (1991). Mortality rates and population density of
tsetse flies correlated with satellite imagery. Nature 351: 739–741.
22. Estrada-Pena A (2002). Increasing habitat suitability in the United States for the
tick that transmits Lyme disease: a remote sensing approach. Environ Health
Perspect 110: 635–640.
23. Fuller RM, Smith GM, Sanderson JM, Hill RA, Thomson AG (2002). The UK
Land Cover Map 2000: Construction of a Parcel-Based Vector Map from
Satellite Images. Cartogr J 39: 15–25.
24. Fuller RM, Cox R, Clarke RT, Rothery P, Hill RA, et al. (2005). The UK land
cover map 2000: Planning, construction and calibration of a remotely sensed,
user-oriented map of broad habitats. Int J Appl Earth Obs 7: 202–216.
25. Diggle PJ (2006). Spatio-temporal point processes, partial likelihood, foot and
mouth disease. Stat Methods Med Res 15: 325–336.
26. Jewell CP, Keeling MJ, Roberts GO (2008). Predicting undetected infections
during the 2007 foot-and-mouth disease outbreak. J R Soc Interface 6: 1145–
1151.
27. King AA, Ionides EL, Pascual M, Bouma MJ (2008). Inapparent infections and
cholera dynamics. Nature 454: 877–879.