Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 184

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Modelling the elimination of river blindness using long-term epidemiological and programmatic data from Mali and Senegal

Open access
Walker, Martin, Stolk, Wilma A., Dixon, Matthew A., Bottomley, Christian, Diawara, Lamine, Traoré, Mamadou O., de Vlas, Sake J., Basáñez, María-Gloria·2017·Epidemics

Abstract

The onchocerciasis transmission models EPIONCHO and ONCHOSIM have been independently developed and used to explore the feasibility of eliminating onchocerciasis from Africa with mass (annual or biannual) distribution of ivermectin within the timeframes proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and endorsed by the 2012 London Declaration on Neglected Tropical Diseases (i.e. by 2020/2025). Based on the findings of our previous model comparison, we implemented technical refinements and tested the projections of EPIONCHO and ONCHOSIM against long-term epidemiological data from two West African transmission foci in Mali and Senegal where the observed prevalence of infection was brought to zero circa 2007-2009 after 15-17 years of mass ivermectin treatment. We simulated these interventions using programmatic information on the frequency and coverage of mass treatments and trained the model projections using longitudinal parasitological data from 27 communities, evaluating the projected outcome of elimination (local parasite extinction) or resurgence. We found that EPIONCHO and ONCHOSIM captured adequately the epidemiological trends during mass treatment but that resurgence, while never predicted by ONCHOSIM, was predicted by EPIONCHO in some communities with the highest (inferred) vector biting rates and associated pre-intervention endemicities. Resurgence can be extremely protracted such that low (microfilarial) prevalence between 1% and 5% can be maintained for 3-5 years before manifesting more prominently. We highlight that post-treatment and post-elimination surveillance protocols must be implemented for long enough and with high enough sensitivity to detect possible residual latent infections potentially indicative of resurgence. We also discuss uncertainty and differences between EPIONCHO and ONCHOSIM projections, the potential importance of vector control in high-transmission settings as a complementary intervention strategy, and the short remaining timeline for African countries to be ready to stop treatment safely and begin surveillance in order to meet the impending 2020/2025 elimination targets.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.epidem.2017.02.005

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 184

Metadata

Authors
Walker, M., Stolk, W. A., Dixon, M. A., Bottomley, C., Diawara, L., Traoré, M. O., de Vlas, S. J., & Basáñez, M.-G.
Venue
Epidemics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-03
Volume
18
Pages
4-15
ISSN
1755-4365 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2594112973
Cited by
184
References
0
FWCI
9.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Modelling the elimination of river blindness using long-term epidemiological and programmatic data from Mali and Senegal. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.epidem.2017.02.005
The paper
Walker, M., Stolk, W. A., Dixon, M. A., Bottomley, C., Diawara, L., Traoré, M. O., de Vlas, S. J., & Basáñez, M.-G. (2017). Modelling the elimination of river blindness using long-term epidemiological and programmatic data from Mali and Senegal. Epidemics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epidem.2017.02.005

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.