Figure 1.
Map of Uganda highlighting study area.
Table 1.
Covariates collected for analysis, indicating variables used for model development.
Figure 2.
Diagram illustrating the two regression methodologies, including the main steps involved in each.
Figure 3.
Village level period prevalence of HAT, 2004–2006.
Blue areas represent water bodies. District boundaries are also shown as black lines.
Table 2.
Results of the first model from the two-step regression analysis, using a binary response variable and all villages.
Figure 4.
Predicted probability of HAT occurrence from the first step of the second analysis.
White and pale green indicate areas with low predicted probability of occurrence. Black circles indicate case villages and white circles represent non-case villages within the study area.
Table 3.
Results of the second step from the two-step regression analysis, using prevalence response variable and a subset of villages.
Figure 5.
Scatter plot of observed prevalence versus predicted prevalence (per 100 population) using the two-step analysis.
Figure 6.
Predicted prevalence of HAT from the second step of the two-step analysis.
White indicates areas predicted to be unsuitable for transmission. Blue circles indicate case villages and white circles represent control villages within the study area, with increasing circle size denoting increasing village period prevalence (2004–2006).
Table 4.
Results of one-step regression analysis using prevalence outcome variable and all villages.
Figure 7.
Scatter plot of observed prevalence versus predicted prevalence (per 100 population) using the one-step analysis.
Figure 8.
Predicted prevalence of HAT from one-step regression analysis.
Figure 9.
Difference in predicted prevalence between first and second analysis.