02127nas a2200289 4500000000100000008004100001653001800042653001600060100001000076700001200086700001100098700001200109700001500121700001100136700001300147700001400160700001400174700001400188700001400202700001500216245012600231856007900357300001300436490000600449520136800455022001401823 2015 d10aTransmissions10aMethodology1 aLiu F1 aPorco T1 aAmza A1 aKadri B1 aNassirou B1 aWest S1 aBailey R1 aKeenan JD1 aSolomon A1 aEmerson P1 aGambhir M1 aLietman TM00aShort-term forecasting of the prevalence of trachoma: Expert opinion, statistical regression, versus transmission models. uhttp://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0004000  ae00040000 v93 a

AUTHOR SUMMARY: Forecasts of infectious diseases are rarely made in a falsifiable manner. Trachoma trials offer an opportunity to actually compare forecasting methods in a masked fashion. The World Health Organization recommends at least three annual antibiotic mass drug administrations where the prevalence of trachoma is greater than 10% in children aged 1–9 years, with coverage at least at 80%. The Program for the Rapid Elimination of Trachoma trials estimated longitudinal prevalence of ocular chlamydial infection from 24 communities treated annually with mass azithromycin. Here, we compared forecasts of the prevalence of infection in each of the 24 communities at 36 months (given antibiotic coverage and biannual assessments from baseline through 30 months, and masked to the 36-month assessments) made by experts, statistical regression, and a transmission model. The transmission model was better than regression, with both far better than experts’ opinion. Construction of guidelines that rely on forecasting future prevalence could consider use of mathematical and statistical models.

for a correction in the Funding section of this article see: http://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0004129

 a1935-2735