Fig 1.
Flow diagram of patch dynamics.
Within each patch, each sub-population follows SEIV dynamics. A single patch with-in patch dynamics is represented within the dotted gray box. This example depicts three patches with the gray box encapsulating patch 1. In addition to the within-patch dynamics, red arrows indicate additional transmission pathways, representing infected individuals from patches 2 and 3 exposing susceptible from patch 1.
Fig 2.
Two theoretical 3-patch metapopulation structures with their corresponding contact matrices, c.
In the fully connected system (A), all of the patches interact with each other equally. In the semi-connected system (B), patch 2 interacts with both patches 1 and 3, but 1 and 3 do not interact with each other.
Fig 3.
Map of microreds in Arequipa, colored by dog population size.
Dog population estimates are from the Ministry of Health [20]. Maps were created using the Leaflet R package [25]. Base map (https://carto.com/basemaps) and data from OpenStreetMap and OpenStreetMap Foundation [26]. The microred borders were drawn in collaboration with the Arequipa Department of Health, spatial data available at https://github.com/bhraynor/RabiesPatchVax.
Table 1.
Arequipa canine rabies model parameterization.
Fig 4.
Representation of posterior mean adjustment for infectious period by district in Arequipa from hierarchical model.
Fig 5.
Transmission coefficient fitting.
The joint parameter space of the within-patch and between-patch transmission coefficient was limited so that rabies dynamics remained persistent but at a low prevalence (<0.15%, red line) with suboptimal (50% coverage) vaccination (A), yet is eliminated successfully at adequate (70%) vaccination (B). Within the range of possible transmission coefficients, the simulations with a sampled 10% detection rate (blue bars with 95% sampling interval) were selected as the best fit via least squares to reported aggregate monthly cases (pink bars) of all microreds (C).
Fig 6.
Infectious daily prevalence depicted for hypothetical model run under different scenarios of staggered, pulsed vaccination.
100 stochastic iterations were run of each scenario. Depicted on each output is the proportion of stochastic iterations where the disease was eliminated from the system. The scenarios represented here are A) Fully-connected system, all patches reaching high vaccination coverage, B) Semi-connected system, all patches reaching high vaccination coverage; C) Fully-connected system, second patch suboptimally vaccinated; D) Semi-connected system, middle patch suboptimally vaccinated second; E) Semi-connected system, edge patch suboptimally vaccinated second; F) semi-connected system, edge patch suboptimally vaccinated last.
Fig 7.
City-wide simulation scenario results.
The aggregated simulated citywide rabies incidence is plotted in red. The different strategies tested were a single pulse campaign reaching 50% coverage (A) and 80% coverage (B) as well as a 6-month staggered campaign reaching 50% converge (C) and 80% coverage (D).
Table 2.
Arequipa City rabies control strategy scenario summary results.