Comparative modeling study finds gradient boosting outperforms recurrent neural networks for dengue forecasting across 27 Brazilian capitals, highlighting the utility of ensemble models.
Dengue is an arboviral disease of high public health relevance, characterized by pronounced temporal variability, nonlinearity, and recurrent outbreaks, which pose challenges to epidemiological surveillance and decision-making. This study evaluated the performance of machine learning methods for short-term forecasting of the weekly dengue morbidity rate in the 27 Brazilian capital cities, comprising the 26 state capitals and Brasília, Federal District, with horizons up to 4 weeks. Epidemiological, climatic, and socioeconomic data were compiled for these capital cities and used to compare a Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU) neural network, formulated as a Multi-Input Multi-Output (MIMO) model, and a Gradient Boosting model (CatBoost), implemented using a Direct forecasting strategy with horizon-specific models. Validation was conducted using a walk-forward approach, with evaluation based on absolute error metrics and the coefficient of determination. The results indicated that the GRU architecture presented recurring limitations, including underfitting, temporal lag, and low capacity to anticipate epidemic peaks. In contrast, the CatBoost model demonstrated greater robustness and better adaptation to the variability of epidemiological time series, showing superior performance in most of the analyzed capitals. The findings reinforce that greater architectural complexity does not necessarily imply better operational performance and highlight the potential of ensemble-based methods for short-term epidemiological surveillance applications. These findings contribute to dengue forecasting by showing that, under a common validation framework, ensemble-based strategies may provide greater operational robustness than recurrent MIMO architectures for short-term prediction in heterogeneous epidemiological settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Silva et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: