scholarly journals The Impact of Meteorological Factors on Communicable Disease Incidence and Its Projection: A Systematic Review

Author(s):  
Mazni Baharom ◽  
Norfazilah Ahmad ◽  
Rozita Hod ◽  
Fadly Syah Arsad ◽  
Fredolin Tangang

Background: Climate change poses a real challenge and has contributed to causing the emergence and re-emergence of many communicable diseases of public health importance. Here, we reviewed scientific studies on the relationship between meteorological factors and the occurrence of dengue, malaria, cholera, and leptospirosis, and synthesized the key findings on communicable disease projection in the event of global warming. Method: This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 flow checklist. Four databases (Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, EBSCOhost) were searched for articles published from 2005 to 2020. The eligible articles were evaluated using a modified scale of a checklist designed for assessing the quality of ecological studies. Results: A total of 38 studies were included in the review. Precipitation and temperature were most frequently associated with the selected climate-sensitive communicable diseases. A climate change scenario simulation projected that dengue, malaria, and cholera incidence would increase based on regional climate responses. Conclusion: Precipitation and temperature are important meteorological factors that influence the incidence of climate-sensitive communicable diseases. Future studies need to consider more determinants affecting precipitation and temperature fluctuations for better simulation and prediction of the incidence of climate-sensitive communicable diseases.

Author(s):  
Elham Ghazanchaei ◽  
Davoud Khorasani-Zavareh ◽  
Javad Aghazadeh-Attari ◽  
Iraj Mohebbi

Background: Patients with non-communicable diseases are vulnerable to disasters. This is a systematic review describing the impact of disasters on non-communicable diseases. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PRISMA standards. Relevant articles published from 1997 to 2019 collected by searching the Scopus, PubMed, Science Direct, databases. We specifically examined reports describing NCDs and including the key words “non-communicable disease and Disasters”. NCDs included cardiovascular, respiratory, diabetes, cancer and mental health diseases. Results: Of the 663 studies identified, only 48 articles met all the eligibility criteria. Most studies have shown the impact of all natural disasters on non-communicable diseases (39.8% n=19). The largest study was the effect of earthquakes on non-communicable diseases (29.2% n=14). For the NCDs targeted by this research, most of the included studies were a combination of four diseases: cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, diabetes and cancer (44% n=21). Followed by cardiovascular disease (14.6% n=7), chronic respiratory disease (12.5% n=6), diabetes and cancer (6.2% n=3) and mental health (12.5% n=6). Conclusion: The incidence of disasters affects the management of treatment and care for patients with NCDs. Specific measures include a multi-part approach to ensuring that patients with non-communicable diseases have access to life-saving services during and after disasters. The approach of the health system should be expanded from traditional approaches to disasters and requires comprehensive planning of health care by policy makers and health professionals to develop effective strategies to enable patients to access medical, therapeutic and diagnostic services in natural disasters.


Author(s):  
Mariya Bezgrebelna ◽  
Kwame McKenzie ◽  
Samantha Wells ◽  
Arun Ravindran ◽  
Michael Kral ◽  
...  

This systematic review of reviews was conducted to examine housing precarity and homelessness in relation to climate change and weather extremes internationally. In a thematic analysis of 15 reviews (5 systematic and 10 non-systematic), the following themes emerged: risk factors for homelessness/housing precarity, temperature extremes, health concerns, structural factors, natural disasters, and housing. First, an increased risk of homelessness has been found for people who are vulnerably housed and populations in lower socio-economic positions due to energy insecurity and climate change-induced natural hazards. Second, homeless/vulnerably-housed populations are disproportionately exposed to climatic events (temperature extremes and natural disasters). Third, the physical and mental health of homeless/vulnerably-housed populations is projected to be impacted by weather extremes and climate change. Fourth, while green infrastructure may have positive effects for homeless/vulnerably-housed populations, housing remains a major concern in urban environments. Finally, structural changes must be implemented. Recommendations for addressing the impact of climate change on homelessness and housing precarity were generated, including interventions focusing on homelessness/housing precarity and reducing the effects of weather extremes, improved housing and urban planning, and further research on homelessness/housing precarity and climate change. To further enhance the impact of these initiatives, we suggest employing the Human Rights-Based Approach (HRBA).


2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (10) ◽  
pp. 1921-1935 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Chapman ◽  
James E. M. Watson ◽  
Alvaro Salazar ◽  
Marcus Thatcher ◽  
Clive A. McAlpine

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 4579-4638 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. C. Peel ◽  
R. Srikanthan ◽  
T. A. McMahon ◽  
D. J. Karoly

Abstract. Two key sources of uncertainty in projections of future runoff for climate change impact assessments are uncertainty between Global Climate Models (GCMs) and within a GCM. Within-GCM uncertainty is the variability in GCM output that occurs when running a scenario multiple times but each run has slightly different, but equally plausible, initial conditions. The limited number of runs available for each GCM and scenario combination within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 3 (CMIP3) and phase 5 (CMIP5) datasets, limits the assessment of within-GCM uncertainty. In this second of two companion papers, the primary aim is to approximate within-GCM uncertainty of monthly precipitation and temperature projections and assess its impact on modelled runoff for climate change impact assessments. A secondary aim is to assess the impact of between-GCM uncertainty on modelled runoff. Here we approximate within-GCM uncertainty by developing non-stationary stochastic replicates of GCM monthly precipitation and temperature data. These replicates are input to an off-line hydrologic model to assess the impact of within-GCM uncertainty on projected annual runoff and reservoir yield. To-date within-GCM uncertainty has received little attention in the hydrologic climate change impact literature and this analysis provides an approximation of the uncertainty in projected runoff, and reservoir yield, due to within- and between-GCM uncertainty of precipitation and temperature projections. In the companion paper, McMahon et al. (2014) sought to reduce between-GCM uncertainty by removing poorly performing GCMs, resulting in a selection of five better performing GCMs from CMIP3 for use in this paper. Here we present within- and between-GCM uncertainty results in mean annual precipitation (MAP), temperature (MAT) and runoff (MAR), the standard deviation of annual precipitation (SDP) and runoff (SDR) and reservoir yield for five CMIP3 GCMs at 17 world-wide catchments. Based on 100 stochastic replicates of each GCM run at each catchment, within-GCM uncertainty was assessed in relative form as the standard deviation expressed as a percentage of the mean of the 100 replicate values of each variable. The average relative within-GCM uncertainty from the 17 catchments and 5 GCMs for 2015–2044 (A1B) were: MAP 4.2%, SDP 14.2%, MAT 0.7%, MAR 10.1% and SDR 17.6%. The Gould–Dincer Gamma procedure was applied to each annual runoff time-series for hypothetical reservoir capacities of 1× MAR and 3× MAR and the average uncertainty in reservoir yield due to within-GCM uncertainty from the 17 catchments and 5 GCMs were: 25.1% (1× MAR) and 11.9% (3× MAR). Our approximation of within-GCM uncertainty is expected to be an underestimate due to not replicating the GCM trend. However, our results indicate that within-GCM uncertainty is important when interpreting climate change impact assessments. Approximately 95% of values of MAP, SDP, MAT, MAR, SDR and reservoir yield from 1× MAR or 3× MAR capacity reservoirs are expected to fall within twice their respective relative uncertainty (standard deviation/mean). Within-GCM uncertainty has significant implications for interpreting climate change impact assessments that report future changes within our range of uncertainty for a given variable – these projected changes may be due solely to within-GCM uncertainty. Since within-GCM variability is amplified from precipitation to runoff and then to reservoir yield, climate change impact assessments that do not take into account within-GCM uncertainty risk providing water resources management decision makers with a sense of certainty that is unjustified.


2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 1615-1639 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. C. Peel ◽  
R. Srikanthan ◽  
T. A. McMahon ◽  
D. J. Karoly

Abstract. Two key sources of uncertainty in projections of future runoff for climate change impact assessments are uncertainty between global climate models (GCMs) and within a GCM. Within-GCM uncertainty is the variability in GCM output that occurs when running a scenario multiple times but each run has slightly different, but equally plausible, initial conditions. The limited number of runs available for each GCM and scenario combination within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 3 (CMIP3) and phase 5 (CMIP5) data sets, limits the assessment of within-GCM uncertainty. In this second of two companion papers, the primary aim is to present a proof-of-concept approximation of within-GCM uncertainty for monthly precipitation and temperature projections and to assess the impact of within-GCM uncertainty on modelled runoff for climate change impact assessments. A secondary aim is to assess the impact of between-GCM uncertainty on modelled runoff. Here we approximate within-GCM uncertainty by developing non-stationary stochastic replicates of GCM monthly precipitation and temperature data. These replicates are input to an off-line hydrologic model to assess the impact of within-GCM uncertainty on projected annual runoff and reservoir yield. We adopt stochastic replicates of available GCM runs to approximate within-GCM uncertainty because large ensembles, hundreds of runs, for a given GCM and scenario are unavailable, other than the Climateprediction.net data set for the Hadley Centre GCM. To date within-GCM uncertainty has received little attention in the hydrologic climate change impact literature and this analysis provides an approximation of the uncertainty in projected runoff, and reservoir yield, due to within- and between-GCM uncertainty of precipitation and temperature projections. In the companion paper, McMahon et al. (2015) sought to reduce between-GCM uncertainty by removing poorly performing GCMs, resulting in a selection of five better performing GCMs from CMIP3 for use in this paper. Here we present within- and between-GCM uncertainty results in mean annual precipitation (MAP), mean annual temperature (MAT), mean annual runoff (MAR), the standard deviation of annual precipitation (SDP), standard deviation of runoff (SDR) and reservoir yield for five CMIP3 GCMs at 17 worldwide catchments. Based on 100 stochastic replicates of each GCM run at each catchment, within-GCM uncertainty was assessed in relative form as the standard deviation expressed as a percentage of the mean of the 100 replicate values of each variable. The average relative within-GCM uncertainties from the 17 catchments and 5 GCMs for 2015–2044 (A1B) were MAP 4.2%, SDP 14.2%, MAT 0.7%, MAR 10.1% and SDR 17.6%. The Gould–Dincer Gamma (G-DG) procedure was applied to each annual runoff time series for hypothetical reservoir capacities of 1 × MAR and 3 × MAR and the average uncertainties in reservoir yield due to within-GCM uncertainty from the 17 catchments and 5 GCMs were 25.1% (1 × MAR) and 11.9% (3 × MAR). Our approximation of within-GCM uncertainty is expected to be an underestimate due to not replicating the GCM trend. However, our results indicate that within-GCM uncertainty is important when interpreting climate change impact assessments. Approximately 95% of values of MAP, SDP, MAT, MAR, SDR and reservoir yield from 1 × MAR or 3 × MAR capacity reservoirs are expected to fall within twice their respective relative uncertainty (standard deviation/mean). Within-GCM uncertainty has significant implications for interpreting climate change impact assessments that report future changes within our range of uncertainty for a given variable – these projected changes may be due solely to within-GCM uncertainty. Since within-GCM variability is amplified from precipitation to runoff and then to reservoir yield, climate change impact assessments that do not take into account within-GCM uncertainty risk providing water resources management decision makers with a sense of certainty that is unjustified.


Atmosphere ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 190
Author(s):  
Robert Ugochukwu Onyeneke ◽  
Chukwuemeka Chinonso Emenekwe ◽  
Jane Onuabuchi Munonye ◽  
Chinyere Augusta Nwajiuba ◽  
Uwazie Iyke Uwazie ◽  
...  

An in-depth understanding of the impact of vulnerability on livelihoods and food security is important in deploying effective adaptation actions. The Nigerian agricultural sector is dominated by rainfed and non-homogenous smallholder farming systems. A number of climate change risk studies have emerged in the last decade. However, little attention has been given to vulnerability assessments and the operationalization of vulnerability. To highlight this shortcoming, this study systematically reviewed climate-change-focused vulnerability assessments in the agricultural sector by evaluating (1) variation in climate variables in Nigeria over time; (2) the state of climate change vulnerability assessment in Nigerian agriculture; (3) the theoretical foundations, operationalization approaches, and frameworks of vulnerability assessments in Nigeria; (4) the methods currently used in vulnerability assessments; and (5) lessons learned from the vulnerability studies. We used a linear trend of climatic data spanning over a period of 56 years (1961–2016) obtained from the Nigerian Meteorological Agency and the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, United Kingdom, along with a systematic review of literature to achieve the objectives. The analysis indicates a significant and positive correlation between temperature and time in all major agro-ecological zones. For precipitation, we found a non-significant correlation between precipitation in the Sahel, Sudan, and Guinea Savanna zones with time, while the other zones recorded positive but significant associations between precipitation and time. The systematic review findings indicate no clear progress in publications focused specifically on vulnerability assessments in the Nigerian agricultural sector. There has been progress recently in applying frameworks and methods. However, there are important issues that require addressing in vulnerability assessments, including low consideration for indigenous knowledge and experience, unclear operationalization of vulnerability, non-standardization of vulnerability measures, and inadequacy of current assessments supporting decision making.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 110
Author(s):  
Rodrigo M. Carrillo-Larco ◽  
J. Gonzalo Acevedo-Rodriguez ◽  
Carlos Altez-Fernandez ◽  
Karol Ortiz-Acha ◽  
Cesar Ugarte-Gil

Background: Cutaneous leishmaniasis is a prevalent communicable disease in low- and middle-income countries, where non-communicable diseases like skin cancer are on the rise. However, the study of multi-morbidity or co-morbidity between communicable and non-communicable diseases is limited, and even null for some tropical or neglected diseases. Nevertheless, looking at these conditions together instead of as isolated entities in places where these illnesses exist, could show new prevention and treatment paths. We aimed to summarize and critically appraise the epidemiological evidence on the association between cutaneous leishmaniasis and skin cancer. Methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review using five search engines (Embase, Medline, Global Health, Scopus and Web of Science). We sought observational studies in which the outcome was skin cancer whilst the exposure was cutaneous leishmaniasis; these conditions should have had laboratory or pathology confirmation. Results: No epidemiological investigations have studied the association between cutaneous leishmaniasis and skin cancer. Most of the evidence about the association of interest is still based on case reports and other clinical observations rather than strong epidemiological observational studies. Conclusions: Research is much needed to verify the repeatedly clinical observation that cutaneous leishmaniasis may be a risk factor for skin cancer. This evidence could inform and guide early diagnosis or prevention of skin cancer in survivors of cutaneous leishmaniasis or where cutaneous leishmaniasis is still highly prevalent. Registration: PROSPERO ID CRD42018111230; registered on 16/10/18.


2004 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 284-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaétan Bourgeois ◽  
Alain Bourque ◽  
Gaétan Deaudelin

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yousef S. Khader ◽  
Mostafa Abdelrahman ◽  
Nour Abdo ◽  
Munjed Al-Sharif ◽  
Ahmed Elbetieha ◽  
...  

AbstractTo summarize the existing knowledge of the impact of climate change on health from previous research in the Eastern Mediterranean region (EMR) and identify knowledge and research gaps.Different databases were searched for relevant studies published in the region between 2000 and 2014. The review was limited to studies reporting the impacts of climate change on health or studying associations between meteorological parameters and well-defined human health outcomes.This systematic review of 78 studies identified many knowledge and research gaps. Research linking climate change and health is scarce in the most vulnerable countries of the region. There is limited information regarding how changes in temperature, precipitation and other weather variables might affect the geographic range and incidence of mortality and morbidity from various diseases. Available research has many limitations and shortcomings that arise from inappropriate study designs, poor assessment of exposure and outcomes, questionable sources of data, lack of standardized methods, poor adjustment of confounders, limited geographical area studies, small sample sizes, poor statistical modeling and not testing for possible interactions between exposures.Research and information on the effect of climate change on health are limited. Longitudinal studies over extended periods of time that investigate the link between climate change and health are needed. There is a need for studies to be expanded to include more countries in the region and to include other environmental, social and economic factors that might affect the spread of the disease.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document