2016
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005049
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modelling Vaccination Strategies against Rift Valley Fever in Livestock in Kenya

Abstract: BackgroundThe impacts of vaccination on the transmission of Rift Valley fever virus (RVFV) have not been evaluated. We have developed a RVFV transmission model comprising two hosts—cattle as a separate host and sheep and goats as one combined host (herein after referred to as sheep)—and two vectors—Aedes species (spp) and Culex spp—and used it to predict the impacts of: (1) reactive vaccination implemented at various levels of coverage at pre-determined time points, (2) targeted vaccination involving either of… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
0
3

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
25
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…one week) in the (E) and (I) compartments. In the absence of vector data, the time spent in (E) is assumed to account for the extrinsic incubation period in the vector (3 days) and the latent (1–6 days) stage in the animal without explicitly modelling these processes, and the time spent in (I) accounted for the infectious stage in the host (3–6 days) [ 34 , 36 , 37 ]. This was chosen because we were interested in fitting the model to the Immune (R) compartment only, whilst allowing the serial interval (defined as the average time of infection between two consecutive cases, as per Wallinga and Lipstich [ 38 ] definition), at the animal level, being 2 weeks; which aligns with the 3 weeks estimated in South Africa at the farm level [ 39 , 40 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…one week) in the (E) and (I) compartments. In the absence of vector data, the time spent in (E) is assumed to account for the extrinsic incubation period in the vector (3 days) and the latent (1–6 days) stage in the animal without explicitly modelling these processes, and the time spent in (I) accounted for the infectious stage in the host (3–6 days) [ 34 , 36 , 37 ]. This was chosen because we were interested in fitting the model to the Immune (R) compartment only, whilst allowing the serial interval (defined as the average time of infection between two consecutive cases, as per Wallinga and Lipstich [ 38 ] definition), at the animal level, being 2 weeks; which aligns with the 3 weeks estimated in South Africa at the farm level [ 39 , 40 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The impact and cost-effectiveness of livestock vaccination have been assessed in specific RVF high-risk areas in Kenya using simulation modeling (40,41). Our analysis demonstrates the impact of vaccination strategies on reducing the number of human and animal cases, through a model calibrated from epidemic data.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Finally, the livestock model was built with similar assumptions than in our previous paper (9). This included a latent (E) and an infectious (I) period of 7 days in livestock, accounting for the extrinsic incubation period in the vector (3-7 days), and the latent (1-6 days) and infectious stages (3-6 days) in livestock (30)(31)(32)(33), without explicitly modelling these processes. Although this may have slightly impacted on the predicted timing of the epidemic peak in humans, our model predictions were in agreement with the observations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%