Figure 1.
YF-affected and unaffected municipalities selected for the present study, São Paulo, Brazil.
Table 1.
Statistically significant variables related to YFV circulation when comparing the two groups.
Figure 2.
Distribution of variables used in the MCA according to their contribution to the F factor.
(DIST_VAC = Distance to areas with recommended YF vaccination; DIST_UC = Distance to a biodiversity conservation unit; MATA = proportion of riparian forest; TRAF = Number of main routes of illegal wildlife traffic up to 100 km away; HUMID = Humidity (Pluviosity/RET); VENT = Influence of the direction of dominant wind routes; SFIHA = Surveillance for Febrile Ictero-hemorrhagic Syndrome (SFIHS).
Table 2.
Weight of each variable for F factor calculation.
Figure 3.
Distribution of the evaluated groups of municipalities according to the F factor, State of São Paulo, Brazil.
(Group 1 – YF-affected municipalities; Group 2 – unaffected municipalities).