Suppr超能文献

疟疾按蚊生存估计与方法学概述。

An overview of malarial Anopheles mosquito survival estimates in relation to methodology.

机构信息

College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, St. Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.

NIHR ARC South West Peninsula (PenARC), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.

出版信息

Parasit Vectors. 2020 May 7;13(1):233. doi: 10.1186/s13071-020-04092-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The transmission of malaria is known to be sensitive to the survival (longevity, mortality) of its mosquito vector, yet there have been few reviews of estimates of this important population parameter in the malaria-carrying genus Anopheles.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic search for and meta-analysis of survival estimates, framed around the methods of estimation, under the major groupings of ‛vertical' (based on stable age or stage frequencies), ‛horizontal' (based on recaptures of marked and released cohorts), and ‛parasitological' (proportion of infectious mosquitoes). Because of the intricacies of the estimation process we provide an outline of these methods.

RESULTS

By meta-analysis we quantify the average of the distribution of daily survival [Formula: see text] for vertical (0.83, 95% CI: 0.80-0.86), horizontal (0.73, 95% CI: 0.66-0.79) and parasitological (0.92, 95% CI: 0.86-0.95) methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis demonstrates the anticipated result that horizontal estimates are lowest because they estimate apparent survival (survival and non-emigration) rather than true survival. On the other hand, vertical methods make strong assumptions about the stability or stationarity of the underlying populations. Further potential sources of methodological bias are mentioned. The substantial differences in estimates between methods indicates that methodological biases need to be considered when making use of available survival estimates.

摘要

背景

疟疾的传播已知对其蚊媒的存活(寿命、死亡率)敏感,但对携带疟疾的按蚊属中这一重要种群参数的估计,却很少有综述。

方法

我们围绕“垂直”(基于稳定的年龄或阶段频率)、“水平”(基于标记和释放群体的再捕获)和“寄生虫学”(感染蚊子的比例)这三个主要分组,对生存估计值进行了系统的搜索和荟萃分析,同时采用了估计方法。由于估计过程的复杂性,我们提供了这些方法的概述。

结果

通过荟萃分析,我们量化了垂直(0.83,95%CI:0.80-0.86)、水平(0.73,95%CI:0.66-0.79)和寄生虫学(0.92,95%CI:0.86-0.95)方法的每日生存分布平均值[公式:见正文]。

结论

荟萃分析表明,水平估计值最低,因为它们估计的是表观生存(生存和不迁移)而不是真实生存。另一方面,垂直方法对基础种群的稳定性或静止性做出了强烈假设。进一步提到了潜在的方法学偏差来源。方法之间的估计值存在显著差异,这表明在利用现有生存估计值时,需要考虑方法学偏差。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ec1d/7206813/4f4b233dcbb7/13071_2020_4092_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验