School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Malaria Alert Centre, University of Malawi College of Medicine, Blantyre, Malawi.
Malar J. 2019 Jul 29;18(1):254. doi: 10.1186/s12936-019-2885-9.
Modelling risk of malaria in longitudinal studies is common, because individuals are at risk for repeated infections over time. Malaria infections result in acquired immunity to clinical malaria disease. Prospective cohorts are an ideal design to relate the historical exposure to infection and development of clinical malaria over time, and analysis methods should consider the longitudinal nature of the data. Models must take into account the acquisition of immunity to disease that increases with each infection and the heterogeneous exposure to bites from infected Anopheles mosquitoes. Methods that fail to capture these important factors in malaria risk will not accurately model risk of malaria infection or disease.
Statistical methods applied to prospective cohort studies of clinical malaria or Plasmodium falciparum infection and disease were reviewed to assess trends in usage of the appropriate statistical methods. The study was designed to test the hypothesis that studies often fail to use appropriate statistical methods but that this would improve with the recent increase in accessibility to and expertise in longitudinal data analysis.
Of 197 articles reviewed, the most commonly reported methods included contingency tables which comprised Pearson Chi-square, Fisher exact and McNemar's tests (n = 102, 51.8%), Student's t-tests (n = 82, 41.6%), followed by Cox models (n = 62, 31.5%) and Kaplan-Meier estimators (n = 59, 30.0%). The longitudinal analysis methods generalized estimating equations and mixed-effects models were reported in 41 (20.8%) and 24 (12.2%) articles, respectively, and increased in use over time. A positive trend in choice of more appropriate analytical methods was identified over time.
Despite similar study designs across the reports, the statistical methods varied substantially and often represented overly simplistic models of risk. The results underscore the need for more effort to be channelled towards adopting standardized longitudinal methods to analyse prospective cohort studies of malaria infection and disease.
在纵向研究中对疟疾风险进行建模很常见,因为个体随着时间的推移会多次感染疟疾。疟疾感染会产生对临床疟疾疾病的获得性免疫力。前瞻性队列是一种理想的设计,可以将历史上的感染暴露与随着时间的推移发生的临床疟疾联系起来,并且分析方法应该考虑到数据的纵向性质。模型必须考虑到随着每次感染而增加的对疾病的免疫力的获得,以及感染的疟蚊叮咬的异质性暴露。未能捕捉到疟疾风险中的这些重要因素的方法将无法准确地对疟疾感染或疾病的风险进行建模。
对前瞻性临床疟疾或恶性疟原虫感染和疾病的队列研究应用的统计方法进行了综述,以评估适当统计方法的使用趋势。本研究旨在检验以下假设:研究通常未能使用适当的统计方法,但随着纵向数据分析的可及性和专业知识的提高,这种情况会得到改善。
在所审查的 197 篇文章中,最常报道的方法包括包含 Pearson Chi-square、Fisher 确切检验和 McNemar's 检验的列联表(n=102,51.8%)、Student's t 检验(n=82,41.6%),其次是 Cox 模型(n=62,31.5%)和 Kaplan-Meier 估计器(n=59,30.0%)。纵向分析方法广义估计方程和混合效应模型分别在 41 篇(20.8%)和 24 篇(12.2%)文章中报道,并且随着时间的推移使用量有所增加。随着时间的推移,选择更适当的分析方法的趋势呈阳性。
尽管报告中的研究设计相似,但统计方法差异很大,通常代表对风险的过于简单化的模型。结果强调需要更加努力采用标准化的纵向方法来分析疟疾感染和疾病的前瞻性队列研究。