Statistical modeling of holding level susceptibility to infection during the 2001 foot and mouth disease epidemic in Great Britain

被引:28
作者
Bessell, Paul R. [1 ]
Shaw, Darren J. [2 ]
Savill, Nicholas J. [1 ]
Woolhouse, Mark E. J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Edinburgh, Ctr Infect Dis, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, Midlothian, Scotland
[2] Univ Edinburgh, Easter Bush Vet Ctr, RDSVS, Roslin, Midlothian, Scotland
基金
英国惠康基金; 英国生物技术与生命科学研究理事会;
关键词
Foot and mouth disease; Epidemiology; Risk modeling; Livestock; Disease control; SPREAD; STRATEGIES; IMPACT; RISK; FMD;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijid.2009.05.003
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Background: An understanding of the factors that determine the risk of members of a susceptible population becoming infected is essential for estimating the potential for disease spread, as opposed to just focusing on transmission from an infected population. Furthermore, analysis of the risk factors can reveal important characteristics of an epidemic and further develop understanding of the processes operating. Methods: This paper describes the development of a mixed effects logistic regression model of susceptibility of holdings to foot and mouth disease (FMD) during the 2001 epidemic in Great Britain following the imposition of a national ban on the movements of susceptible animals (NMB). Results: The principal risk factors identified in the model were shorter distances to the nearest infectious seed (a holding infected before the NMB) and the county of the holding (principally Cumbria). Additional risk factors included holdings that are mixed species rather than single species, the surface area of the holding, and the number of cattle within 10 km (all p < 0.001), but not surrounding sheep densities (p > 0.1). The fit of the model was evaluated using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC) and the Hosmer and Lemeshow Chi-squared statistic; the fit was good with both tests (area under the ROC = 0.962 and Hosmer and Lemeshow Chi-squared statistic = 49.98 (p > 0.1)). Conclusions: Holdings at greatest risk of infection can be identified using simple readily available risk factors; this information could be employed in the control of future FMD epidemics. (C) 2009 International Society for Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:E210 / E215
页数:6
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]   Clinical and laboratory investigations of five outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease during the 2001 epidemic in the United Kingdom [J].
Alexandersen, S ;
Kitching, RP ;
Mansley, LM ;
Donaldson, AI .
VETERINARY RECORD, 2003, 152 (16) :489-496
[2]  
Anderson I., 2002, Foot mouth disease 2001: lessons to be learned inquiry report
[3]   Geographic and topographic determinants of local FMD transmission applied to the 2001 UK FMD epidemic [J].
Bessell, Paul R. ;
Shaw, Darren J. ;
Savill, Nicholas J. ;
Woolhouse, Mark E. J. .
BMC VETERINARY RESEARCH, 2008, 4 (1)
[4]  
Crawley M. J., 2007, R BOOK, DOI DOI 10.1002/9780470515075
[5]   Spatio-temporal point processes, partial likelihood, foot and mouth disease [J].
Diggle, Peter J. .
STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2006, 15 (04) :325-336
[6]   Foot-and-mouth disease virus [J].
Domingo, E ;
Baranowski, E ;
Escarmís, C ;
Sobrino, F .
COMPARATIVE IMMUNOLOGY MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2002, 25 (5-6) :297-308
[7]   Relative risks of the uncontrollable (airborne) spread of FMD by different species [J].
Donaldson, AI ;
Alexandersen, S ;
Sorensen, JH ;
Mikkelsen, T .
VETERINARY RECORD, 2001, 148 (19) :602-604
[8]   Transmission intensity and impact of control policies on the foot and mouth epidemic in Great Britain [J].
Ferguson, NM ;
Donnelly, CA ;
Anderson, RM .
NATURE, 2001, 413 (6855) :542-548
[9]   The foot-and-mouth epidemic in Great Britain: Pattern of spread and impact of interventions [J].
Ferguson, NM ;
Donnelly, CA ;
Anderson, RM .
SCIENCE, 2001, 292 (5519) :1155-1160
[10]   Temporal and geographical distribution of cases of foot-and-mouth disease during the early weeks of the 2001 epidemic in Great Britain [J].
Gibbens, JC ;
Wilesmith, JW .
VETERINARY RECORD, 2002, 151 (14) :407-+