Evidence-based risk assessment and communication: a new global dengue-risk map for travellers and clinicians

International travel can expose travellers to pathogens not commonly found in their countries of residence, like dengue virus. Travellers and the clinicians who advise and treat them have unique needs for understanding the geographic extent of risk for dengue. Specifically, they should assess the ne...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of travel medicine 2016-06, Vol.23 (6), p.taw062
Hauptverfasser: Jentes, Emily S, Lash, R Ryan, Johansson, Michael A, Sharp, Tyler M, Henry, Ronnie, Brady, Oliver J, Sotir, Mark J, Hay, Simon I, Margolis, Harold S, Brunette, Gary W
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 6
container_start_page taw062
container_title Journal of travel medicine
container_volume 23
creator Jentes, Emily S
Lash, R Ryan
Johansson, Michael A
Sharp, Tyler M
Henry, Ronnie
Brady, Oliver J
Sotir, Mark J
Hay, Simon I
Margolis, Harold S
Brunette, Gary W
description International travel can expose travellers to pathogens not commonly found in their countries of residence, like dengue virus. Travellers and the clinicians who advise and treat them have unique needs for understanding the geographic extent of risk for dengue. Specifically, they should assess the need for prevention measures before travel and ensure appropriate treatment of illness post-travel. Previous dengue-risk maps published in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Yellow Book lacked specificity, as there was a binary (risk, no risk) classification. We developed a process to compile evidence, evaluate it and apply more informative risk classifications. We collected more than 839 observations from official reports, ProMED reports and published scientific research for the period 2005-2014. We classified each location as frequent/continuous risk if there was evidence of more than 10 dengue cases in at least three of the previous 10 years. For locations that did not fit this criterion, we classified locations as sporadic/uncertain risk if the location had evidence of at least one locally acquired dengue case during the last 10 years. We used expert opinion in limited instances to augment available data in areas where data were sparse. Initial categorizations classified 134 areas as frequent/continuous and 140 areas as sporadic/uncertain. CDC subject matter experts reviewed all initial frequent/continuous and sporadic/uncertain categorizations and the previously uncategorized areas. From this review, most categorizations stayed the same; however, 11 categorizations changed from the initial determinations. These new risk classifications enable detailed consideration of dengue risk, with clearer meaning and a direct link to the evidence that supports the specific classification. Since many infectious diseases have dynamic risk, strong geographical heterogeneities and varying data quality and availability, using this approach for other diseases can improve the accuracy, clarity and transparency of risk communication.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/jtm/taw062
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5345513</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1819904660</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-7c5d886f369d19039c139a2feddc750b146b1bc9acf79119b2703dbbf37ad07d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkUtrHDEQhIVJ8PuSH2B0DIGJW9LOaJRDIBjHCRh8cc6i9ZiN7BlpLc2syb-PkrWNfVKDvqruogj5wOAzAyXO7-bpfMZH6PgeOWQS-qYX0L6rM1Ntw1TPD8hRKXcAwHvO98kBlx1vVwCHZLzcBuej9Y3B4h3NodxTLMWXMvk4U4yO2jRNSwwW55DiF4o0-ke6HpPBkVbtevHNf9mEGzqkTOeMWz-OPpedfAxVHDCWE_J-wLH406f3mPz6fnl78aO5vrn6efHturFC9nMjbev6vhtEpxxTIJRlQiEfvHNWtmDYqjPMWIV2kKpmNFyCcMYMQqID6cQx-brz3Sxm8s7WIBlHvclhwvxHJwz67U8Mv_U6bXUrVm3LRDX4-GSQ08Piy6ynUGzNhNGnpWjWM6Vg1XVQ0U871OZUSvbDyxoG-l89utajd_VU-Oz1YS_ocx_iL6Iuj4U</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1819904660</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evidence-based risk assessment and communication: a new global dengue-risk map for travellers and clinicians</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Jentes, Emily S ; Lash, R Ryan ; Johansson, Michael A ; Sharp, Tyler M ; Henry, Ronnie ; Brady, Oliver J ; Sotir, Mark J ; Hay, Simon I ; Margolis, Harold S ; Brunette, Gary W</creator><creatorcontrib>Jentes, Emily S ; Lash, R Ryan ; Johansson, Michael A ; Sharp, Tyler M ; Henry, Ronnie ; Brady, Oliver J ; Sotir, Mark J ; Hay, Simon I ; Margolis, Harold S ; Brunette, Gary W</creatorcontrib><description>International travel can expose travellers to pathogens not commonly found in their countries of residence, like dengue virus. Travellers and the clinicians who advise and treat them have unique needs for understanding the geographic extent of risk for dengue. Specifically, they should assess the need for prevention measures before travel and ensure appropriate treatment of illness post-travel. Previous dengue-risk maps published in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Yellow Book lacked specificity, as there was a binary (risk, no risk) classification. We developed a process to compile evidence, evaluate it and apply more informative risk classifications. We collected more than 839 observations from official reports, ProMED reports and published scientific research for the period 2005-2014. We classified each location as frequent/continuous risk if there was evidence of more than 10 dengue cases in at least three of the previous 10 years. For locations that did not fit this criterion, we classified locations as sporadic/uncertain risk if the location had evidence of at least one locally acquired dengue case during the last 10 years. We used expert opinion in limited instances to augment available data in areas where data were sparse. Initial categorizations classified 134 areas as frequent/continuous and 140 areas as sporadic/uncertain. CDC subject matter experts reviewed all initial frequent/continuous and sporadic/uncertain categorizations and the previously uncategorized areas. From this review, most categorizations stayed the same; however, 11 categorizations changed from the initial determinations. These new risk classifications enable detailed consideration of dengue risk, with clearer meaning and a direct link to the evidence that supports the specific classification. Since many infectious diseases have dynamic risk, strong geographical heterogeneities and varying data quality and availability, using this approach for other diseases can improve the accuracy, clarity and transparency of risk communication.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1195-1982</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1708-8305</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1708-8305</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/jtm/taw062</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27625400</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Asia, Southeastern - epidemiology ; Dengue - diagnosis ; Dengue - epidemiology ; Dengue - prevention &amp; control ; Dengue Virus ; Evidence-Based Practice - organization &amp; administration ; Humans ; Original ; Travel ; Travel Medicine - methods ; Tropical Climate</subject><ispartof>Journal of travel medicine, 2016-06, Vol.23 (6), p.taw062</ispartof><rights>Published by Oxford University Press 2016. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.</rights><rights>Published by Oxford University Press 2016. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US. 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-7c5d886f369d19039c139a2feddc750b146b1bc9acf79119b2703dbbf37ad07d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-7c5d886f369d19039c139a2feddc750b146b1bc9acf79119b2703dbbf37ad07d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,315,781,785,886,27929,27930</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27625400$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jentes, Emily S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lash, R Ryan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansson, Michael A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharp, Tyler M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henry, Ronnie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brady, Oliver J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sotir, Mark J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hay, Simon I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Margolis, Harold S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brunette, Gary W</creatorcontrib><title>Evidence-based risk assessment and communication: a new global dengue-risk map for travellers and clinicians</title><title>Journal of travel medicine</title><addtitle>J Travel Med</addtitle><description>International travel can expose travellers to pathogens not commonly found in their countries of residence, like dengue virus. Travellers and the clinicians who advise and treat them have unique needs for understanding the geographic extent of risk for dengue. Specifically, they should assess the need for prevention measures before travel and ensure appropriate treatment of illness post-travel. Previous dengue-risk maps published in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Yellow Book lacked specificity, as there was a binary (risk, no risk) classification. We developed a process to compile evidence, evaluate it and apply more informative risk classifications. We collected more than 839 observations from official reports, ProMED reports and published scientific research for the period 2005-2014. We classified each location as frequent/continuous risk if there was evidence of more than 10 dengue cases in at least three of the previous 10 years. For locations that did not fit this criterion, we classified locations as sporadic/uncertain risk if the location had evidence of at least one locally acquired dengue case during the last 10 years. We used expert opinion in limited instances to augment available data in areas where data were sparse. Initial categorizations classified 134 areas as frequent/continuous and 140 areas as sporadic/uncertain. CDC subject matter experts reviewed all initial frequent/continuous and sporadic/uncertain categorizations and the previously uncategorized areas. From this review, most categorizations stayed the same; however, 11 categorizations changed from the initial determinations. These new risk classifications enable detailed consideration of dengue risk, with clearer meaning and a direct link to the evidence that supports the specific classification. Since many infectious diseases have dynamic risk, strong geographical heterogeneities and varying data quality and availability, using this approach for other diseases can improve the accuracy, clarity and transparency of risk communication.</description><subject>Asia, Southeastern - epidemiology</subject><subject>Dengue - diagnosis</subject><subject>Dengue - epidemiology</subject><subject>Dengue - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Dengue Virus</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Practice - organization &amp; administration</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Travel</subject><subject>Travel Medicine - methods</subject><subject>Tropical Climate</subject><issn>1195-1982</issn><issn>1708-8305</issn><issn>1708-8305</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkUtrHDEQhIVJ8PuSH2B0DIGJW9LOaJRDIBjHCRh8cc6i9ZiN7BlpLc2syb-PkrWNfVKDvqruogj5wOAzAyXO7-bpfMZH6PgeOWQS-qYX0L6rM1Ntw1TPD8hRKXcAwHvO98kBlx1vVwCHZLzcBuej9Y3B4h3NodxTLMWXMvk4U4yO2jRNSwwW55DiF4o0-ke6HpPBkVbtevHNf9mEGzqkTOeMWz-OPpedfAxVHDCWE_J-wLH406f3mPz6fnl78aO5vrn6efHturFC9nMjbev6vhtEpxxTIJRlQiEfvHNWtmDYqjPMWIV2kKpmNFyCcMYMQqID6cQx-brz3Sxm8s7WIBlHvclhwvxHJwz67U8Mv_U6bXUrVm3LRDX4-GSQ08Piy6ynUGzNhNGnpWjWM6Vg1XVQ0U871OZUSvbDyxoG-l89utajd_VU-Oz1YS_ocx_iL6Iuj4U</recordid><startdate>201606</startdate><enddate>201606</enddate><creator>Jentes, Emily S</creator><creator>Lash, R Ryan</creator><creator>Johansson, Michael A</creator><creator>Sharp, Tyler M</creator><creator>Henry, Ronnie</creator><creator>Brady, Oliver J</creator><creator>Sotir, Mark J</creator><creator>Hay, Simon I</creator><creator>Margolis, Harold S</creator><creator>Brunette, Gary W</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201606</creationdate><title>Evidence-based risk assessment and communication: a new global dengue-risk map for travellers and clinicians</title><author>Jentes, Emily S ; Lash, R Ryan ; Johansson, Michael A ; Sharp, Tyler M ; Henry, Ronnie ; Brady, Oliver J ; Sotir, Mark J ; Hay, Simon I ; Margolis, Harold S ; Brunette, Gary W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-7c5d886f369d19039c139a2feddc750b146b1bc9acf79119b2703dbbf37ad07d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Asia, Southeastern - epidemiology</topic><topic>Dengue - diagnosis</topic><topic>Dengue - epidemiology</topic><topic>Dengue - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Dengue Virus</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Practice - organization &amp; administration</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Travel</topic><topic>Travel Medicine - methods</topic><topic>Tropical Climate</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jentes, Emily S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lash, R Ryan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansson, Michael A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharp, Tyler M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henry, Ronnie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brady, Oliver J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sotir, Mark J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hay, Simon I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Margolis, Harold S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brunette, Gary W</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of travel medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jentes, Emily S</au><au>Lash, R Ryan</au><au>Johansson, Michael A</au><au>Sharp, Tyler M</au><au>Henry, Ronnie</au><au>Brady, Oliver J</au><au>Sotir, Mark J</au><au>Hay, Simon I</au><au>Margolis, Harold S</au><au>Brunette, Gary W</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evidence-based risk assessment and communication: a new global dengue-risk map for travellers and clinicians</atitle><jtitle>Journal of travel medicine</jtitle><addtitle>J Travel Med</addtitle><date>2016-06</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>taw062</spage><pages>taw062-</pages><issn>1195-1982</issn><issn>1708-8305</issn><eissn>1708-8305</eissn><abstract>International travel can expose travellers to pathogens not commonly found in their countries of residence, like dengue virus. Travellers and the clinicians who advise and treat them have unique needs for understanding the geographic extent of risk for dengue. Specifically, they should assess the need for prevention measures before travel and ensure appropriate treatment of illness post-travel. Previous dengue-risk maps published in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Yellow Book lacked specificity, as there was a binary (risk, no risk) classification. We developed a process to compile evidence, evaluate it and apply more informative risk classifications. We collected more than 839 observations from official reports, ProMED reports and published scientific research for the period 2005-2014. We classified each location as frequent/continuous risk if there was evidence of more than 10 dengue cases in at least three of the previous 10 years. For locations that did not fit this criterion, we classified locations as sporadic/uncertain risk if the location had evidence of at least one locally acquired dengue case during the last 10 years. We used expert opinion in limited instances to augment available data in areas where data were sparse. Initial categorizations classified 134 areas as frequent/continuous and 140 areas as sporadic/uncertain. CDC subject matter experts reviewed all initial frequent/continuous and sporadic/uncertain categorizations and the previously uncategorized areas. From this review, most categorizations stayed the same; however, 11 categorizations changed from the initial determinations. These new risk classifications enable detailed consideration of dengue risk, with clearer meaning and a direct link to the evidence that supports the specific classification. Since many infectious diseases have dynamic risk, strong geographical heterogeneities and varying data quality and availability, using this approach for other diseases can improve the accuracy, clarity and transparency of risk communication.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>27625400</pmid><doi>10.1093/jtm/taw062</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1195-1982
ispartof Journal of travel medicine, 2016-06, Vol.23 (6), p.taw062
issn 1195-1982
1708-8305
1708-8305
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5345513
source MEDLINE; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Asia, Southeastern - epidemiology
Dengue - diagnosis
Dengue - epidemiology
Dengue - prevention & control
Dengue Virus
Evidence-Based Practice - organization & administration
Humans
Original
Travel
Travel Medicine - methods
Tropical Climate
title Evidence-based risk assessment and communication: a new global dengue-risk map for travellers and clinicians
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T13%3A08%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evidence-based%20risk%20assessment%20and%20communication:%20a%20new%20global%20dengue-risk%20map%20for%20travellers%20and%20clinicians&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20travel%20medicine&rft.au=Jentes,%20Emily%20S&rft.date=2016-06&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=taw062&rft.pages=taw062-&rft.issn=1195-1982&rft.eissn=1708-8305&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/jtm/taw062&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1819904660%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1819904660&rft_id=info:pmid/27625400&rfr_iscdi=true