Fig 1.
Location of Guangzhou city in Guangdong province, China.
Fig 1 was generated by ArcGIS 10.0 (Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedLands, California, U.S.A).
Fig 2.
Daily number of streets with DF cases in Guangzhou city, China, between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2014.
Fig 3.
The average DF incidence rates and increment of average DF incidence rates.
A, B, &C were generated by ArcGIS 10.0 (Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedLands, California, U.S.A.). The spatial distributions for annual mean DF incidence rates during 2006±2011; (B) The spatial distributions for annual mean DF incidence rates during 2012±2014; (C) The spatial distribution for increment of annual mean DF incidence rates from 2006±2011 to 2012±2014.
Fig 4.
The spatial distributions of high and low DF risk streets and the counts of daily indigenous DF cases in high and low risk streets.
Fig 4A was generated by ArcGIS 10.0 (Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedLands, California, U.S.A). (A) High risk streets with RRs>1 and low risk streets with RRs≤1. (B) The epidemic pattern of daily accumulative dengue cases in high-risk clustering streets and the low-risk clustering streets in Guangzhou city, 2006–2014.
Fig 5.
The spatial and temporal clusters of daily indigenous DF cases in Guangzhou city, 2006–2014.
A&C were produced by ArcGIS 10.0 (Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedLands, California, U.S.A). (A) Spatial cluster circles of each year produced by SaTScan were displayed in different color. Both the most likely cluster and the secondary subcluster were displayed. Only the most likely clusters were displayed in the enlarged map. (B) Time clusters of each significant cluster of each year were plotted by different color and a dot in the earliest date denote the date of the onset of the first case of each year. In the year 2006 and 2013, “1” is the most likely cluster and “2” is the secondary likely cluster. (C) The streets where the first cases occur were plotted in different color and the date of onset were labeled below the legend.
Table 1.
Cluster statistics from spatiotemporal cluster analysis from 2006 to 2014.
Table 2.
The associations between DF and social-environmental factors.
Table 3.
The association between DF incidence rates and longitude and latitude geographically in each street during the study period.