Why the study?
Existing prediction models for hand foot mouth disease typically use traditional dynamics or neural networks without accounting for climate and other factors.
Does a BiLSTM model incorporating meteorological factors improve the prediction accuracy of hand foot mouth disease compared to traditional models?
Does a BiLSTM model incorporating meteorological factors improve the prediction accuracy of hand foot mouth disease compared to traditional models?
A BiLSTM deep learning model incorporating meteorological factors with a 14-day time step improves the prediction accuracy of hand foot mouth disease outbreaks.
May improve HFMD outbreak forecasting; leaves open prospective validation before surveillance use.
At present, many neural networks have achieved good results in disease prediction. For hand foot mouth disease(HFMD), mastering its epidemic law can provide scientific basis for effective formulation of prevention and control measures. However, most existing models use SIER infectious disease dynamics model, seasonal difference moving ARIMA or RNN, LSTM and other traditional networks to predict, and do not take climate and other factors into account. In this paper, firstly, a new data set is established, and BiLSTM is used to predict hand, mouth and foot disease. In addition, climate factors are taken into account in the prediction process. Thirdly, we conducted the Controlled experiment with the traditional models to calculate their MAE, MSE, RMSE, MAPE and other evaluation values. And the experiment shows that robustness of BiLSTM model in HFMD is better than these models. Finally, we analyzes the model from the perspective of time step, and sets the time step to 7 days, 14 days, and 21 days. It is found that when the time step is 14 days, the prediction performance is the best. Finally, we also made a comparative analysis through ablation experiments, and found that the HFMD dataset with meteorological factors was better than the HFMD dataset without meteorological factors in prediction accuracy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lai et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: