BackgroundSince the introduction of polio vaccines in the 1950’s and 60’s, eradication of poliovirus from the world has been technically feasible. Progress towards this goal, however, has been uneven and influenced by social and political factors that challenge the implementation of robust immunization programs. While violence and insecurity are often cited as barriers to eradication, current global risk models are largely based on virologic and immunologic indicators measured at national levels. In this manuscript, we quantify the relevance of indicators of violence and insecurity on the risk of polio spread.Methods and findingsUsing logistic regression models and public data sources, we evaluate the relationship between measures of violence and instability and the location of poliomyelitis cases between 2006 and 2015 at the country-level, both individually and after controlling for more proximal determinants of disease, such as nearby circulating poliovirus and vaccination rates. We found that increases in a country’s Fragile States Index (FSI) and Global Peace Index (GPI), aggregate indicators of violence and instability, were associated with the occurrence of poliovirus cases in the subsequent year (p< 0.01), even after controlling for established risk factors. These effects of violence and insecurity must be mediated through immunity and exposure to poliovirus, coarse measures of which are included in our model. This also implies that in our study, and in risk models in general, the interpretation depends on the quality and granularity of available data.ConclusionNational virologic and immunologic indicators understate the risk of poliovirus spread in areas with violence and insecurity, and the inclusion of such factors improves precision. In addition, the link between violence and incidence of disease highlights the broader challenge of implementing health interventions in conflict areas. We discuss practical implications of this work in understanding and measuring the risks to polio eradication and other global health initiatives, and the policy implications of the need to reach vulnerable populations in conflict zones.