Understanding human mobility’s role in malaria transmission is critical to successful control and elimination. However, common approaches to measuring mobility are ill-equipped for remote regions such as the Amazon. This study develops a network survey to quantify the effect of community connectivity and mobility on malaria transmission.
We measure community connectivity across the study area using a respondent driven sampling design among key informants who are at least 18 years of age. 45 initial communities will be selected: 10 in Brazil, 10 in Ecuador and 25 in Peru. Participants will be recruited in each initial node and administered a survey to obtain data on each community’s mobility patterns. Survey responses will be ranked and the 2–3 most connected communities will then be selected and surveyed. This process will be repeated for a third round of data collection. Community network matrices will be linked with each country’s malaria surveillance system to test the effects of mobility on disease risk.
This study protocol has been approved by the institutional review boards of Duke University (USA), Universidad San Francisco de Quito (Ecuador), Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (Peru) and Universidade Federal Minas Gerais (Brazil). Results will be disseminated in communities by the end of the study.
Global Positioning System (GPS) technology is increasingly used in health research to capture individual mobility and contextual and environmental exposures. However, the tools, techniques and decisions for using GPS data vary from study to study, making comparisons and reproducibility challenging.
The objectives of this systematic review were to (1) identify best practices for GPS data collection and processing; (2) quantify reporting of best practices in published studies; and (3) discuss examples found in reviewed manuscripts that future researchers may employ for reporting GPS data usage, processing and linkage of GPS data in health studies.
A systematic review.
Electronic databases searched (24 October 2023) were PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022322166).
Included peer-reviewed studies published in English met at least one of the criteria: (1) protocols involving GPS for exposure/context and human health research purposes and containing empirical data; (2) linkage of GPS data to other data intended for research on contextual influences on health; (3) associations between GPS-measured mobility or exposures and health; (4) derived variable methods using GPS data in health research; or (5) comparison of GPS tracking with other methods (eg, travel diary).
We examined 157 manuscripts for reporting of best practices including wear time, sampling frequency, data validity, noise/signal loss and data linkage to assess risk of bias.
We found that 6% of the studies did not disclose the GPS device model used, only 12.1% reported the per cent of GPS data lost by signal loss, only 15.7% reported the per cent of GPS data considered to be noise and only 68.2% reported the inclusion criteria for their data.
Our recommendations for reporting on GPS usage, processing and linkage may be transferrable to other geospatial devices, with the hope of promoting transparency and reproducibility in this research.
CRD42022322166.