IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0007925.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping the global distribution of podoconiosis: Applying an evidence consensus approach

Author

Listed:
  • Kebede Deribe
  • Hope Simpson
  • Jorge Cano
  • David M Pigott
  • Nicole Davis Weaver
  • Elizabeth A Cromwell
  • Oliver J Brady
  • Rachel L Pullan
  • Abdisalan M Noor
  • Daniel Argaw
  • Christopher J L Murray
  • Simon J Brooker
  • Simon I Hay
  • Melanie J Newport
  • Gail Davey

Abstract

Background: Podoconiosis is a type of elephantiasis characterised by swelling of the lower legs. It is often confused with other causes of tropical lymphedema and its global distribution is uncertain. Here we synthesise the available information on the presence of podoconiosis to produce evidence consensus maps of its global geographical distribution. Methods and findings: We systematically searched available data on podoconiosis in SCOPUS and MEDLINE from inception, updated to 10 May, 2019, and identified observational and population-based studies reporting podoconiosis. To establish existence of podoconiosis, we used the number of cases reported in studies and prevalence data with geographical locations. We then developed an index to assess evidence quality and reliability, assigning each country an evidence consensus score. Using these summary scores, we then developed a contemporary global map of national-level podoconiosis status. Conclusion: The global distribution of podoconiosis is not clearly known; the disease extent and limits provided here inform the best contemporary map of the distribution of podoconiosis globally from available data. These results help identify surveillance needs, direct future mapping activities, and inform prevention plans and burden estimation of podoconiosis. Author summary: The global distribution of podoconiosis is uncertain. With our current understanding of its distribution still incomplete, many of the countries suspected to be endemic for podoconiosis are based on expert opinion and lack published evidence of confirmed cases. In this study, we used multiple data sources and health metrics to identify countries with presence and absence of podoconiosis with appropriate uncertainties. After assembling a database of different evidence types we constructed a weighted score for each country called ‘evidence consensus scores’. We used these scores to measure the certainty of the presence and absence of podoconiosis. The maps produced help to identify evidence gaps and uncertainties in the current global distribution of podoconiosis. Countries with evidence of podoconiosis are mostly clustered in Africa, and a few in Asia and Latin America. We have also identified countries with indeterminate status on the presence and absences of podoconiosis. These countries are characterised by weak health systems and multiple co-endemic diseases causing lower leg swelling, potentially leading to misdiagnosis of podoconiosis. Given these challenges, we recommend intensified disease surveillance and active case searching be implemented in areas where evidence is lacking.

Suggested Citation

  • Kebede Deribe & Hope Simpson & Jorge Cano & David M Pigott & Nicole Davis Weaver & Elizabeth A Cromwell & Oliver J Brady & Rachel L Pullan & Abdisalan M Noor & Daniel Argaw & Christopher J L Murray & , 2019. "Mapping the global distribution of podoconiosis: Applying an evidence consensus approach," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0007925
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007925
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0007925
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0007925&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0007925?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0007925. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.