Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 52 references

Hospitalization in the transmission of dengue dynamics: The impact on public health policies

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A dengue model with hospitalization shows the reproduction number splits into undiagnosed and hospitalized contributions, making hospital effectiveness the stronger policy lever.

desk verdict The R0 = sqrt(Ru + Rd) decomposition is a genuinely useful result, but the global stability proof has a real gap and a unit error in the human mortality rate distorts the numerical policy story. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02913 v1 pith:7SBP7RNF submitted 2019-08-08 q-bio.PE

Fabio Sanchez , Jorge Arroyo-Esquivel , Paola Vasquez This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-bio.PE MSC 92D30
keywords denguebasicreproductivenumberhospitalizationcompartmentalmodelsensitivityanalysisglobalstabilityvector-bornediseasepublichealthpolicy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper builds a dengue transmission model that explicitly tracks hospitalized patients alongside infected and undiagnosed individuals. Its central claim is that the basic reproduction number \(\mathcal{R}_0\) factors into two separate contributions: one from undiagnosed infections and one from hospitalized (diagnosed) infections, giving \(\mathcal{R}_0 = \sqrt{R_u + R_d}\). The paper argues that raising the effectiveness of hospitalization lowers \(\mathcal{R}_0\) faster than raising the fraction of patients who are hospitalized, and that the disease-free equilibrium is globally stable whenever \(\mathcal{R}_0 < 1\). A sympathetic reader would care because the result gives public health officials a concrete ranking of levers: making hospitals safer and reducing onward transmission from patients may matter more than simply admitting more patients.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the next-generation matrix \($FV^{{-1}}$\) of the eight-compartment system, whose dominant eigenvalue gives \(\mathcal{R}_0 = \sqrt{R_u+R_d}\). This identity separates the silent transmission route (undiagnosed infected people who remain in the community) from the managed route (hospitalized patients whose infectious contacts are reduced by the effectiveness factor \(\eta\)), turning \(\mathcal{R}_0\) into a sum of interpretable contributions. The decomposition is what supports the numerical comparison of \(\eta\) versus \(p\) and the sensitivity indices.

What would settle it

Recompute \(\mathcal{R}_0\) and the sensitivity indices with \(1/\mu_h = 25{,}550\) days while keeping every other baseline value from Table 4; if the most likely \(\mathcal{R}_0\) range and the ranking of \(\delta,\eta,p\) change materially, the numerical policy conclusions do not carry through.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is the decomposition \(\mathcal{R}_0 = \sqrt{R_u + R_d}\), where \(R_u\) is the contribution of undiagnosed infected humans, \(\frac{\beta_{hv}\beta_{vh}\alpha_h\alpha_v}{(\mu_h+\alpha_h)(\mu_h+\gamma+\delta)\mu_v(\mu_v+\alpha_v)}(1-\eta p)\), and \(R_d\) replaces the factor \((1-\eta p)\) with \(\frac{\delta(1-\eta)}{\mu_h+\gamma}\), the contribution of hospitalized patients. Because hospitalized patients transmit at a reduced rate \((1-\eta)\) and stay in the hospital class for an average \(\frac{1}{\mu_h+\gamma}\), the model yields a closed-form \(\mathcal{R}_0\) whose dependence on the hospitalization effectiveness \(\eta\) is stronger than its dependence on the hospitalization probability \(p\). The paper also proves, via a standard global-stability method, that the disease-free equilibrium is globally asymptotically stable when \(\mathcal{R}_0<1\), meaning the infection cannot persist when the threshold is below one. The sensitivity analysis ranks the vector mortality rate \(\mu_v\) as the most influential parameter and identifies \(\delta\), \(\eta\), and \(p\) as feasible policy levers.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical estimates and policy ranking depend on a human death rate taken from a 70-day lifetime rather than the usual 70-year lifetime; if the intended value is 70 years, the error multiplies \(\mu_h\) by about 365 and changes the reported \(\mathcal{R}_0\) distribution and sensitivity indices.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If \(\mathcal{R}_0<1\), the disease-free equilibrium is globally asymptotically stable, so any intervention that pushes the threshold below one is predicted to eliminate transmission from any starting state.
  • Increasing the effectiveness of hospitalization \(\eta\) reduces \(\mathcal{R}_0\) more quickly than increasing the proportion of patients hospitalized \(p\), making safer hospital environments and reduced onward transmission from patients the stronger policy lever in the model.
  • The uncertainty analysis places the most likely \(\mathcal{R}_0\) between 0.5 and 2 under baseline parameters, suggesting that modest, achievable parameter changes could bring high-transmission settings below threshold.
  • The sensitivity indices put vector mortality \(\mu_v\) at the top of the ranking, consistent with continued emphasis on vector control as the central dengue intervention.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the human lifetime is corrected from 70 days to the usual 70 years, the baseline \(\mathcal{R}_0\), the uncertainty distribution, and the sensitivity ranking would shift; the qualitative ranking of \(\eta\) over \(p\) might survive, but the quantitative thresholds would need recomputation.
  • The same \(\sqrt{R_u+R_d}\) structure could be transplanted into models with multiple serotypes or seasonal forcing, where the split between diagnosed and undiagnosed transmission might change optimal vaccination or vector-control timing.
  • A field estimation of \(\eta\) from hospital-based studies—how many mosquito bites hospitalized dengue patients receive—would directly fix the model's most policy-relevant parameter.
  • The decomposition does not include the cost of hospitalization; combining it with cost data would let a health ministry compare the cost per unit reduction in \(\mathcal{R}_0\) of hospital-safety improvements versus admission-related policies.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper constructs an eight-compartment dengue transmission model with an explicit hospitalized (diagnosed) human compartment, parameterized using Costa Rican data. The authors derive the basic reproduction number R0 by the next-generation matrix method, decompose R0 into undiagnosed and hospitalized contributions, and prove invariance of the feasible region and stability properties of the disease-free equilibrium. They then perform local sensitivity analysis and global uncertainty quantification for R0, and numerically compare changes in the hospitalization effectiveness parameter (eta) versus the hospitalization probability (p), concluding that increasing eta lowers R0 more efficiently than increasing p. The main public-health policy recommendations are that improving the effectiveness of hospitalization and encouraging early diagnosis can reduce dengue transmission.

Significance. If the technical issues identified below are corrected, the paper would provide a useful framework for quantifying the transmission-reducing effect of hospital-based interventions for dengue. The R0 expression is derived from first principles, cleanly separates hospital-related transmission channels, and is grounded in Costa Rican hospitalization data. The sensitivity analysis and the eta-versus-p scenario comparison are potentially actionable for public health policy. However, the numerical and theoretical claims currently rest on two load-bearing defects: an invalid inequality in the global-stability proof and a misspecified human lifetime parameter that shifts the sensitivity and uncertainty results. The paper does not include reproducible code or machine-checked proofs, and the global stability argument is not valid as written.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.2, proof of Theorem 3] Condition (3) of the Castillo-Chavez, Feng, and Huang theorem is not established because the fourth component of G-hat(X,Z) is beta_vh (i_h + (1 - eta) h) * (1 - s_v / (1 - eta h)), not beta_vh (i_h + (1 - eta) h) * (1 - s_h / (1 - eta h)). The text asserts s_h <= 1 and s_h / (1 - eta h) <= 1, but the ratio in the actual expression contains s_v, not s_h. Since s_v can equal 1 while h > 0 within the invariant set (for example, s_v = 1 and eta h > 0), the ratio s_v / (1 - eta h) exceeds 1, making G-hat_4 negative whenever i_h + (1 - eta) h > 0. Therefore the claimed global asymptotic stability of the disease-free equilibrium for R0 < 1 is unsupported. This is load-bearing because the abstract and discussion present global stability as a main theoretical result, and the policy implication that R0 < 1 guarantees elimination depends on it.
  2. [Table 4 and Section 3.3] The baseline value 1/mu_h = 70 days is inconsistent with the cited source [10], which uses a human life expectancy of about 70 years; the correct conversion in daily units is approximately 25,550 days. Using 70 days makes mu_h about 365 times too large. Because mu_h appears in the denominators of the infectious periods and in the exposed survival probability in the R0 formula, this misspecification substantially changes the sensitivity index reported for mu_h (-6.42) and shifts the uncertainty distribution in Figure 3 downward, weakening the stated conclusion that R0 is most likely between 0.5 and 2. The sensitivity rankings and the policy interpretation of Figure 7 need to be recomputed with the corrected human lifetime before the numerical conclusions can be accepted.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.4, paragraphs 1 and 2] The paragraph beginning 'We explored numerical experiments in attempting to find the optimal effectiveness of hospitalization of individuals' is repeated verbatim; one copy should be deleted.
  2. [Section 3.2, solution of F(X,0)] The displayed solution for X(t) in the proof of condition (2) is not correct: it should be (1 + (s_h(0)-1)e^{-mu_h t}, r(0)e^{-mu_h t}, 1 + (s_v(0)-1)e^{-mu_v t}), with the initial conditions made explicit. The printed expression '1 + e^{-mu_h}' is not a feasible solution and appears to be a typographical error.
  3. [Section 2, proof of Theorem 2] The equilibrium derivation contains several notation inconsistencies: the variable phi appears in the formulas for i_h^* and h^* but is not defined (the model uses p), and the expression for Gamma_v is missing the subscript on alpha. These should be corrected for readability.
  4. [Section 3.4 and figures] Figure 6 is not referenced in the text, and the text moves from Figures 4 and 5 directly to Figure 7; the figure numbering or references should be adjusted.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: R0 is derived from the model's next-generation matrix, and the policy conclusions follow algebraically; the only self-cited input is a non-load-bearing baseline parameter.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is self-contained. System (2) is a mechanistic compartmental model, and Section 3.1 computes R0 from the displayed F and V matrices by the standard next-generation operator, yielding R0 = sqrt(Ru + Rd); the split into undiagnosed and hospitalized contributions is an algebraic decomposition, not a fit to data. The comparisons of eta versus p follow from the sensitivity indices in Table 5, which are computed directly from the closed-form R0 expression, so the claim that increasing the effectiveness of hospitalization lowers R0 faster than increasing the hospitalization proportion is a property of the formula rather than a fitted outcome. The only self-cited input is delta = 0.20 from reference [39] (Sanchez et al.), used as a baseline parameter in Table 4; this affects numerical simulations and the uncertainty distribution, but it is not used to construct the R0 formula or the stability theorem, so it is not load-bearing circularity. The Theorem 3 proof in Section 3.2 has a genuine mathematical gap: the Castillo-Chavez condition is checked with s_h/(1 - eta*h), although the fourth component of G-hat contains s_v/(1 - eta*h), which may exceed 1; that is a correctness defect, not a circularity, because the theorem is not assumed or fitted. Therefore no step in the paper reduces by construction to its own inputs; the score of 1 reflects only the minor self-cited parameter value.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model introduces a compartment (hospitalized patients) that represents a real public health category, not a new physical entity. The main free parameters are p and eta, both chosen without empirical grounding, and the mis-scaled 1/mu_h. The structural assumptions about hospitalization effectiveness and constant population sizes are domain assumptions, standard in compartmental epidemiology.

free parameters (3)
  • p (proportion hospitalized/diagnosed) = 0.2 (baseline)
    Table 4 marks p as 'estimated' with no reference. It directly enters R0 through (1-eta*p) and is a main policy lever in Section 3.4.
  • eta (effectiveness of hospitalization) = 0.8 (baseline)
    Table 4 marks eta as 'estimated'. The central policy message, that increasing eta lowers R0 more than increasing p, depends on this ad hoc value.
  • 1/mu_h (human lifetime) = 70 days (likely should be ~25,550 days)
    Table 4 gives 70 days, inconsistent with the cited human life expectancy in years. This free parameter choice distorts sensitivity indices and R0 distribution.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Human and mosquito population sizes are constant (birth rate equals death rate).
    Used throughout System (2); ignores demographic changes and disease mortality.
  • domain assumption Hospitalized patients transmit at fraction (1-eta) of non-hospitalized patients, and the effective host population for mosquito biting is Nh-eta*H.
    This is the mechanism by which hospitalization affects transmission; it is introduced in System (2) and drives the R0 decomposition. No empirical validation is offered.
  • standard math The Castillo-Chavez et al. [5] theorem conditions are sufficient for global stability of the DFE.
    Invoked in Section 3.2 to prove Theorem 3.
  • standard math The next-generation operator method [11] applies for R0.
    Used in Section 3.1 to compute R0.
  • domain assumption Parameter values in Table 4, including delta from [39] and beta_hv, beta_vh, alpha_h, alpha_v, gamma, mu_v from [24], are representative of dengue/Costa Rica.
    Sensitivity analysis and simulations rely on these baseline values.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Hospitalization in the transmission of dengue dynamics: The impact on public health policies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7SBP7RNF

@misc{pith2026190802913,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Hospitalization in the transmission of dengue dynamics: The impact on public health policies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7SBP7RNF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02913}
}
abstract

Dengue virus has caused major problems for public health officials for decades in tropical and subtropical countries. We construct a compartmental model that includes the risk of hospitalization and its impact on public health policies. The basic reproductive number, $\mathcal{R}_0$, is computed, as well as a sensitivity analysis on $\mathcal{R}_0$ parameters and discuss the relevance in public health policies. The local and global stability of the disease-free equilibrium is established. Numerical simulations are performed to better determine future prevention/control strategies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.02913 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. In Costa Rica, the vast majority of hospitalizations were reported in the coastal regions. These areas, are characterized by been highly infested by the Aedes mosquito and by having the higher incidence of dengue cases throughout the year [7]. Model state variables are presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Model diagram. (2) s 0 h = µh − βhvshiv − µhsh, e 0 h = βhvshiv − (µh + αh)eh, i 0 h = (1 − p)αheh − (µh + γ + δ)ih, } 0 = pαheh + δih − (µh + γ)}, r 0 = γih + γ} − µhr, s 0 v = µv − βvhsv (ih+(1−η)h) 1−ηh − µvsv, e 0 v = βvhsv (ih+(1−η)h) 1−ηh − (µv + αv)ev, i 0 v = αvev − µviv, where sh + eh + ih + } + r = 1 and sv + ev + iv = 1. Theorem 1 The closed set Ω = {(sh, eh, ih, }, r, sv, ev, iv) ∈ <8 + : 0 < sh + eh + i… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Probability distribution of R0 after 100,000 samples. As suggested by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Time series solutions of Infected (presumed undiagnosed) individuals, ih [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Time series solutions of hospitalized (presumed diagnosed) individuals, } [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Time series solutions of infected vectors, Iv [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: R0 versus the probability of hospitalization and effectiveness of hospitalization. 4 Discussion In Costa Rica, as in most of the endemic countries, prevention and control strategies have focused on vector control mainly through insecticides targeting at larval or adult…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [10]

    Determining important parameters in the spread of malaria through the sensitivity analysis of a mathematical model

    Chitnis, N.; Hyman, J.M.; Cushing, J. (2008) “Determining important parameters in the spread of malaria through the sensitivity analysis of a mathematical model”, Bull. Math. Biol., 70, 1272–1296, DOI:10.1007/s11538-008-9299-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s11538-008-9299-0 2008

  2. [1]

    Revisiting dengue virus–host cell interaction: new insights into molecular and cellular virology

    Acosta, E.G.; Kumar, A.; Bartenschlager, R. (2014) “Revisiting dengue virus–host cell interaction: new insights into molecular and cellular virology”, Advances in virus research, 88, 1–109, DOI:10.1016/B978-0-12-800098-4.00001-5

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-800098-4.00001-5 2014

  3. [2]

    The value of educational messages embedded in a community-based approach to combat dengue fever: a sys- tematic review and meta regression analysis

    Al-Muhandis, N.; Hunter, P.R., (2011) “The value of educational messages embedded in a community-based approach to combat dengue fever: a sys- tematic review and meta regression analysis”, PLoS Negl Trop Dis , 5, 1–9, DOI:10.1371/journal.pntd.0001278

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0001278 2011

  4. [3]

    The global distribution and burden of dengue

    Bhatt, S.; Gething, P.W.; Brady, O.J.; Messina, J.P.; Farlow, A.W.; et al. (2013) “The global distribution and burden of dengue”, Nature, 5, 504–507, DOI:10.1038/nature12060

    doi:10.1038/nature12060 2013

  5. [4]

    Refining the global spatial limits of dengue virus transmission by evidence-based consensus

    Brady, O.J.; Gething, P.W.; Bhatt, S.; Messina, J.P.; Brownstein, J.S.; et al. (2012) “Refining the global spatial limits of dengue virus transmission by evidence-based consensus”, PLoS Negl Trop Dis, 6, 115–123, DOI:10.1371/journal.pntd.0001760

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0001760 2012

  6. [5]

    On the computation of R0 and its role on global stability

    Castillo-Chavez, C.; Feng, Z.; Huang, W.; (2002) “On the computation of R0 and its role on global stability”, in Mathematical Approaches for Emerging and Reemerging Infectious Diseases:An Introduction. The IMA V olumes in Mathematics and its Applications, 1, 229–250

    work page 2002

  7. [6]

    Guía para la Organización de la Atención y Manejo de los Pacientes con Dengue y Dengue Grave

    Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social “Guía para la Organización de la Atención y Manejo de los Pacientes con Dengue y Dengue Grave ”, http://www.binasss.sa.cr/protocolos/dengue.pdf

    work page

  8. [7]

    Egresos Hospitalarios debidos a dengue

    Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social “Egresos Hospitalarios debidos a dengue" 2018

    work page 2018

Show all 52 references
  1. [8]

    Host genetics and dengue fever

    Xavier-Carvalho, C.; Cardoso, C.; de Souza, F.; Pachecho, A.G.; Moraes, M.O. (2017) “Host genetics and dengue fever”, Infect. Genet. Evol. , 56, 99–110, DOI:10.1016/j.meegid.2017.11.009

    2017 doi

  2. [9]

    Disease and economic burdens of dengue

    Castro, M.C.; Wilson, M.E.; Bloom, D.E. (2017) “Disease and economic burdens of dengue”, Lancet Infect Dis, 17, 70–78, DOI:10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30545-X. RUNNING TITLE 16

    2017 doi

  3. [11]

    On the definition and the computation of the basic reproduction ratio R0 in models for infec- tious diseases in heterogeneous populations

    Diekmann, O.; Heesterbeek, J.A.P.; Mets, J.A.J. (1990) “On the definition and the computation of the basic reproduction ratio R0 in models for infec- tious diseases in heterogeneous populations”, J. Math. Biol , 28, 365–382, DOI:10.1007/BF00178324

    1990 doi

  4. [12]

    Asymp- tomatic humans transmit dengue virus to mosquitoes

    Duong, V .; Lambrechts, L.; Paul, R.E.; Ly, S.; Lay, R.S.; et al. (2015) “Asymp- tomatic humans transmit dengue virus to mosquitoes”, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci , 112, 14688–14693, DOI:10.1073/pnas.1508114112

    2015 doi

  5. [13]

    A model for dengue disease with variable human population

    Esteva, L.; Vargas, C. (1999) “A model for dengue disease with variable human population”, J. Math. Biol., 38, 220–240, DOI:10.1007/s002850050147

    1999 doi

  6. [14]

    Competitive exclusion in a vector-host model for the dengue fever

    Feng, Z.; Velasco-Hernández, J. (1997) “Competitive exclusion in a vector-host model for the dengue fever”, J. Math. Biol., 35, 523–544

    1997

  7. [15]

    Dengue/dengue hemorrhagic fever: the emergence of a global health problem

    Gubler, D.J.; Clark, G.G. (1995) “Dengue/dengue hemorrhagic fever: the emergence of a global health problem”, Emerging Infect. Dis. , 1, 55–57, DOI:10.3201/eid0102.952004

    1995

  8. [16]

    Dengue and Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever

    Gubler, D.J. (1998) “Dengue and Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever”, Clin. Microbiol. Rev., 11, 480–496, DOI:10.1128/CMR.11.3.480

    1998 doi

  9. [17]

    Epidemic dengue/dengue hemorrhagic fever as a public health, social and economic problem in the 21st century

    Gubler, D.J. (2002) “Epidemic dengue/dengue hemorrhagic fever as a public health, social and economic problem in the 21st century”, Trends Microbiol., 10, 100–103, DOI:10.1016/S0966-842X(01)02288-0

    2002 doi

  10. [18]

    The dengue vector Aedes aegypti: what comes next

    Jansen, C.; Beebe, N.W. (2009) “The dengue vector Aedes aegypti: what comes next”, Microbes Infect., 12, 272–279, DOI:10.1016/j.micinf.2009.12.011

    2009 doi

  11. [19]

    Modeling Infectious Diseases in Humans and Animals

    Keeling, M.J.; Rohani, P. (2008) “Modeling Infectious Diseases in Humans and Animals”, Princeton University Press, New Yersey

    2008

  12. [20]

    Evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test for detection of dengue infection using a single-tag hybridization chromatographic-printed array strip format

    Liles, V .R.; Pangilinan, L.S.; Daroy, M.G.; Dimamay, M.T.A.; Reyes, R.S. (2019) “Evaluation of a rapid diagnostic test for detection of dengue infection using a single-tag hybridization chromatographic-printed array strip format”, Eur . J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis., 38, 1...

    2019 doi

  13. [21]

    The differ- ences of clinical manifestations and laboratory findings in children and adults with dengue virus infection

    Kittigul, L.; Pitakarnjanakul, P.; Sujirarat, D.; Siripanichgon K. (2009) “The differ- ences of clinical manifestations and laboratory findings in children and adults with dengue virus infection”, J. Clin. Virol., 39, 76–81, DOI:10.1016/j.jcv.2007.04.006

    2009 doi

  14. [22]

    Rapid diagnostic tests for determining dengue serostatus: a system- atic review and key informant interviews

    Luo, R.; Fongwen, N.; Kelly-Cirino, C.; Harris, E.; Wilder-Smith, A.; Peeling, R.; (2009) “Rapid diagnostic tests for determining dengue serostatus: a system- atic review and key informant interviews”, Clin. Microbiol. Infect. , 25, 659–666, DOI:10.1016/j.cmi.2019.01.002

    2009 doi

  15. [23]

    Patients related diagnostic delay in dengue: an important cause of morbidity and mortality

    Mallhi, T.H.; Khan, A.H.; Sarriff, A. (2016) “Patients related diagnostic delay in dengue: an important cause of morbidity and mortality”, Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health, 4, 200–201, DOI:10.1016/j.cegh.2016.08.002 RUNNING TITLE 17

    2016 doi

  16. [24]

    Com- paring dengue and chikungunya emergence and endemic transmission in A. aegypti and A. albopictus

    Manore, C.A.; Hickmann, K.S.; Xu, S.; Wearing, H.J.; Hyman J.M. (2014) “Com- paring dengue and chikungunya emergence and endemic transmission in A. aegypti and A. albopictus”, J. Theor . Biol., 356, 174–191, DOI:10.1016/j.jtbi.2014.04.033

    2014 doi

  17. [25]

    El dengue en Costa Rica: evolución histórica, situación actual y desafíos

    Morice, A.; Marín R.; Ávila, M. (2010) “El dengue en Costa Rica: evolución histórica, situación actual y desafíos”, La Salud Pública en Costa Rica. Estado actual, retos y perspectivas. San José , Universidad de Costa Rica, San José, 197– 217

    2010

  18. [26]

    Análisis de situación de salud

    Ministerio de Salud “Análisis de situación de salud" 2018. Avail- able from: http://www.ministeriodesalud.go.cr/index.php/ vigilancia-de-la-salud/analisis-de-situacion-de-salud

    2018

  19. [27]

    Lineamientos nacionales para el control del dengue

    Ministerio de Salud “Lineamientos nacionales para el control del dengue"

  20. [28]

    Epidemiology of dengue: past, present and future prospects

    Murray, N.; Quam, M.B.; Wilder-Smith, A. (2013) “Epidemiology of dengue: past, present and future prospects”, Clin Epidemiol , 5, 299–309, DOI:10.2147/CLEP.S34440

    2013 doi

  21. [29]

    Dynamics of dengue disease severity determined by the interplay between viral genetics and serotype-specific immunity

    OhAinle, M.; Balmaseda, A.; Macalalad, A.R.; Tellez Y .; Zody, M.C.; et al. (2011) “Dynamics of dengue disease severity determined by the interplay between viral genetics and serotype-specific immunity”,Sci Transl Med, 3, 114ra128–114ra128.], DOI:10.1126/scitranslmed.3003084

    2011 doi

  22. [30]

    International Experiences in Social Mobilization and Communication for Dengue Prevention and Control

    Parks, W.J.; Lloyd, L.S.; Nathan, M.B.; Hosein, E.; Odugleh, A.; et al. (2004) “International Experiences in Social Mobilization and Communication for Dengue Prevention and Control.”, Dengue Bull., 28, 1–7

    2004

  23. [31]

    Blood Feeding Patterns of Aedes ae- gypti and Aedes albopictus in Thailand

    Ponlawat, A.; Harrington, L.C. (2005) “Blood Feeding Patterns of Aedes ae- gypti and Aedes albopictus in Thailand”, J. Med. Entomol. , 42, 844–849, DOI:10.1603/0022-2585(2005)042[0844:BFPOAA]2.0.CO;2

    2005 doi

  24. [32]

    In- teractions between serotypes of dengue highlight epidemiological impact of cross- immunity

    Reich, N.G.; Shrestha, S.; King, A.A.; Rohani, P.; Lessler, J.; et al. (2013) “In- teractions between serotypes of dengue highlight epidemiological impact of cross- immunity”, J R Soc Interface , 10, DOI:10.1098/rsif.2013.0414

    2013

  25. [33]

    Aedes albopictus and the reemergence of Dengue

    Rezza, G. (2012) “Aedes albopictus and the reemergence of Dengue”, BMC Public Health, 12, 72–75, DOI:10.1186/1471-2458-12-72

    2012 doi

  26. [34]

    Achieving sustainability of community-based dengue control in Santiago de Cuba

    Toledo, M.E.; Vanlerberghe, V .; Perez, D.; Lefevre, P.; Ceballos, E.; et al. (2007) “Achieving sustainability of community-based dengue control in Santiago de Cuba”, Soc Sci Med, 64, 976–988, DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.10.033

    2007 doi

  27. [35]

    Roth, G.A.; Abate, D.; Abate, K.H.; Abay, S.M.; Abbafati, C.; et al. (2018) “Global, regional, and national age-sex-specific mortality for 282 causes of death in 195 countries and territories, 1980–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Bur- den of Disease Study 2017”, The ...

    2018 doi

  28. [36]

    Dengue contingency planning: from research to policy and practice

    Runge-Ranzinger, S.; Kroeger, A.; Olliaro, P.; McCall, P.J.; Sánchez-Tejeda, G.; et al. (2016) “Dengue contingency planning: from research to policy and practice”, PLoS Negl Trop Dis, 10, 1–16, DOI:10.1371/journal.pntd.0004916

    2016 doi

  29. [37]

    Mod- els for Dengue Transmission and Control

    Sanchez, F.; Engman, M.; Harrington, L.; Castillo-Chavez, C. (2006) “Mod- els for Dengue Transmission and Control”, Contemp. Math. , 410, 311–326, DOI:10.1090/conm/410/07734

    2006 doi

  30. [38]

    Change in host behavior and its impact on the transmission dynamics of dengue

    Sanchez, F.; Murillo, D.; Castillo-Chavez, C. (2012) “Change in host behavior and its impact on the transmission dynamics of dengue”, BIOMAT 2011, 191–203, DOI:10.1142/97898143977110013

    2012 doi

  31. [39]

    Comparative anal- ysis of dengue versus chikungunya outbreaks in Costa Rica

    Sanchez, F.; Barboza, L.; Burton, D.; Cintrón-Arias, A. (2018) “Comparative anal- ysis of dengue versus chikungunya outbreaks in Costa Rica”, Ric. Mat., 67, 163– 174, DOI:10.1007/s11587-018-0362-3

    2018 doi

  32. [40]

    Molecular Characteriza- tion of Two Major Dengue Outbreaks in Costa Rica

    Soto-Garita, C.; Somogyi, T.; Vicente-Santos, A. (2016) “Molecular Characteriza- tion of Two Major Dengue Outbreaks in Costa Rica”, Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg , 95, 201–2015, DOI:10.4269/ajtmh.15-0835

    2016 doi

  33. [41]

    Barriers and bridges to prevention and control of dengue: the need for a social– ecological approach

    Spiegel, J.; Bennett, S.; Hattersley, L.; Hayden, M.H.; Kittayapong,P.; et al. (2005) “Barriers and bridges to prevention and control of dengue: the need for a social– ecological approach”, EcoHealth, 2, 273–290, DOI:10.1007/s10393-005-8388-x

    2005 doi

  34. [42]

    (2012) “Dengue”, N

    Simmons, C.P.; Farrar, J.J.; van Vinh Chau, N.; Willis, B. (2012) “Dengue”, N. Engl. J. Med, 12, 1423–1432, DOI:10.1056/NEJMra1110265

    2012 doi

  35. [43]

    Clinical development and regulatory points for consideration for second-generation live attenuated dengue vaccines

    Vannice, K.S.; Wilder-Smith, A.; Barrett, A.; Carrijo, K.; Cavaleri, M.; et al. (2018) “Clinical development and regulatory points for consideration for second-generation live attenuated dengue vaccines”, V accine, 36, 3411–3417, DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.02.062

    2018 doi

  36. [44]

    Dengue in travelers

    Wilder-Smith, A.; Schwartz, E. (2005) “Dengue in travelers”, N. Engl. J. Med, 353, 924–932, DOI:10.1056/NEJMra041927

    2005 doi

  37. [45]

    Live-attenuated tetravalent dengue vaccines: the needs and challenges of post-licensure evaluation of vaccine safety and effectiveness

    Wichmann, O.; Vannice, K.; Asturias, E.; de Albuquerque Luna E.J.; Longini I.; et al. (2017) “Live-attenuated tetravalent dengue vaccines: the needs and challenges of post-licensure evaluation of vaccine safety and effectiveness”, V accine, 35, 5535– 5542, DOI:10.1016/j.vaccin...

    2017 doi

  38. [46]

    Dengue: guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, pre- vention and control

    World Health Organization “Dengue: guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, pre- vention and control" 2009. Available from: https://www.who.int/rpc/ guidelines/9789241547871/en/

    2009

  39. [47]

    Handbook for clinical management of dengue

    World Health Organization “Handbook for clinical management of dengue"

  40. [48]

    Handbook for integrated vector management

    World Health Organization “Handbook for integrated vector management" 2012. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/ 10665/44768/9789241502801_eng.pdf?sequence=1. RUNNING TITLE 19

    2012

  41. [49]

    Dengue Bulletin

    World Health Organization “Dengue Bulletin" 2016. Available from: https: //apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/255696

    2016

  42. [50]

    Dengue serotype-specific differences in clinical manifestation, laboratory parameters and risk of severe disease in adults, Singapore

    Yung, C.F.; Lee, K.S.; Thein, T.L.; Tan, L.K.; Gan, V .C.; et al. (2015) “Dengue serotype-specific differences in clinical manifestation, laboratory parameters and risk of severe disease in adults, Singapore”, Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., 92, 999–1005, DOI:10.4269/ajtmh.14-0628

    2015 doi

  43. [2010]

    Available from: http://www.solucionesss.com/descargas/ G-Leyes/LINEAMIENTOS_NACIONALES_PARA_EL_CONTROL_DEL_ DENGUE.pdf

  44. [2012]

    Available from: https://www.who.int/denguecontrol/ 9789241504713/en/

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.