Understanding Mosquito Surveillance Data for Analytic Efforts: A Case Study
Affiliation
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of ArizonaIssue Date
2021
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
Oxford University PressCitation
Brown, H. E., Sedda, L., Sumner, C., Stefanakos, E., Ruberto, I., & Roach, M. (2021). Understanding Mosquito Surveillance Data for Analytic Efforts: A Case Study. Journal of Medical Entomology, 58(4), 1619–1625.Journal
Journal of medical entomologyRights
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Mosquito surveillance data can be used for predicting mosquito distribution and dynamics as they relate to human disease. Often these data are collected by independent agencies and aggregated to state and national level portals to characterize broad spatial and temporal dynamics. These larger repositories may also share the data for use in mosquito and/or disease prediction and forecasting models. Assumed, but not always confirmed, is consistency of data across agencies. Subtle differences in reporting may be important for development and the eventual interpretation of predictive models. Using mosquito vector surveillance data from Arizona as a case study, we found differences among agencies in how trapping practices were reported. Inconsistencies in reporting may interfere with quantitative comparisons if the user has only cursory familiarity with mosquito surveillance data. Some inconsistencies can be overcome if they are explicit in the metadata while others may yield biased estimates if they are not changed in how data are recorded. Sharing of metadata and collaboration between modelers and vector control agencies is necessary for improving the quality of the estimations. Efforts to improve sharing, displaying, and comparing vector data from multiple agencies are underway, but existing data must be used with caution.Note
12 month embargo; published: 22 February 2021EISSN
1938-2928PubMed ID
33615382Version
Final accepted manuscriptae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1093/jme/tjab018
Scopus Count
Collections
Related articles
- Rescuing Troves of Hidden Ecological Data to Tackle Emerging Mosquito-Borne Diseases.
- Authors: Rund SSC, Moise IK, Beier JC, Martinez ME
- Issue date: 2019 Mar
- Georgia's collaborative approach to expanding mosquito surveillance in response to Zika virus: a case study.
- Authors: Rustin RC, Martin D, Sevilimedu V, Pandeya S, Rochani H, Kelly R
- Issue date: 2017 Jan-Jun
- USING CITIZEN SCIENCE TO ENHANCE SURVEILLANCE OF AEDES AEGYPTI IN ARIZONA, 2015-17.
- Authors: Tarter KD, Levy CE, Yaglom HD, Adams LE, Plante L, Casal MG, Gouge DH, Rathman R, Stokka D, Weiss J, Venkat H, Walker KR
- Issue date: 2019 Mar
- The importance of being urgent: The impact of surveillance target and scale on mosquito-borne disease control.
- Authors: Schwab SR, Stone CM, Fonseca DM, Fefferman NH
- Issue date: 2018 Jun
- Murray Valley encephalitis virus surveillance and control initiatives in Australia. National Arbovirus Advisory Committee of the Communicable Diseases Network Australia.
- Authors: Spencer JD, Azoulas J, Broom AK, Buick TD, Currie B, Daniels PW, Doggett SL, Hapgood GD, Jarrett PJ, Lindsay MD, Lloyd G, Mackenzie JS, Merianos A, Moran RJ, Ritchie SA, Russell RC, Smith DW, Stenhouse FO, Whelan PI
- Issue date: 2001 Apr