Uncovering social and environmental factors that increase the burden of climate-sensitive diarrheal infections on children.

Climate-sensitive infectious diseases are an issue of growing concern due to global warming and the related increase in the incidence of extreme weather and climate events. Diarrhea, which is strongly associated with climatic factors, remains among the leading causes of child death globally, disproportionately affecting populations in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We use survey data for 51 LMICs between 2000 and 2019 in combination with gridded climate data to estimate the association between precipitation shocks and reported symptoms of diarrheal illness in young children. We account for differences in exposure risk by climate type and explore the modifying role of various social factors. We find that droughts are positively associated with diarrhea in the tropical savanna regions, particularly during the dry season and dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry transition seasons. In the humid subtropical regions, we find that heavy precipitation events are associated with increased risk of diarrhea during the dry season and the transition from dry-to-wet season. Our analysis of effect modifiers highlights certain social vulnerabilities that exacerbate these associations in the two climate zones and present opportunities for public health intervention. For example, we show that stool disposal practices, child feeding practices, and immunizing against the rotavirus modify the association between drought and diarrhea in the tropical savanna regions. In the humid subtropical regions, household's source of water and water disinfection practices modify the association between heavy precipitation and diarrhea. The evidence of effect modification varies depending on the type and duration of the precipitation shock.

Characterization of Groundwater Recharge and Flow in California's San Joaquin Valley From InSAR-Observed Surface Deformation.

Surface deformation in California's Central Valley (CV) has long been linked to changes in groundwater storage. Recent advances in remote sensing have enabled the mapping of CV deformation and associated changes in groundwater resources at increasingly higher spatiotemporal resolution. Here, we use interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) from the Sentinel-1 missions, augmented by continuous Global Positioning System (cGPS) positioning, to characterize the surface deformation of the San Joaquin Valley (SJV, southern two-thirds of the CV) for consecutive dry (2016) and wet (2017) water years. We separate trends and seasonal oscillations in deformation time series and interpret them in the context of surface and groundwater hydrology. We find that subsidence rates in 2016 (mean -42.0 mm/yr; peak -345 mm/yr) are twice that in 2017 (mean -20.4 mm/yr; peak -177 mm/yr), consistent with increased groundwater pumping in 2016 to offset the loss of surface-water deliveries. Locations of greatest subsidence migrated outwards from the valley axis in the wetter 2017 water year, possibly reflecting a surplus of surface-water supplies in the lowest portions of the SJV. Patterns in the amplitude of seasonal deformation and the timing of peak seasonal uplift reveal entry points and potential pathways for groundwater recharge into the SJV and subsequent groundwater flow within the aquifer. This study provides novel insight into the SJV aquifer system that can be used to constrain groundwater flow and subsidence models, which has relevance to groundwater management in the context of California's 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).

Understanding the Impact of Rainfall on Diarrhea: Testing the Concentration-Dilution Hypothesis Using a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Projected increases in extreme weather may change relationships between rain-related climate exposures and diarrheal disease. Whether rainfall increases or decreases diarrhea rates is unclear based on prior literature. The concentration-dilution hypothesis suggests that these conflicting results are explained by the background level of rain: Rainfall following dry periods can flush pathogens into surface water, increasing diarrhea incidence, whereas rainfall following wet periods can dilute pathogen concentrations in surface water, thereby decreasing diarrhea incidence. OBJECTIVES: In this analysis, we explored the extent to which the concentration-dilution hypothesis is supported by published literature. METHODS: To this end, we conducted a systematic search for articles assessing the relationship between rain, extreme rain, flood, drought, and season (rainy vs. dry) and diarrheal illness. RESULTS: A total of 111 articles met our inclusion criteria. Overall, the literature largely supports the concentration-dilution hypothesis. In particular, extreme rain was associated with increased diarrhea when it followed a dry period [incidence rate ratio (IRR)=1.26; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05, 1.51], with a tendency toward an inverse association for extreme rain following wet periods, albeit nonsignificant, with one of four relevant studies showing a significant inverse association (IRR=0.911; 95% CI: 0.771, 1.08). Incidences of bacterial and parasitic diarrhea were more common during rainy seasons, providing pathogen-specific support for a concentration mechanism, but rotavirus diarrhea showed the opposite association. Information on timing of cases within the rainy season (e.g., early vs. late) was lacking, limiting further analysis. We did not find a linear association between nonextreme rain exposures and diarrheal disease, but several studies found a nonlinear association with low and high rain both being associated with diarrhea. DISCUSSION: Our meta-analysis suggests that the effect of rainfall depends on the antecedent conditions. Future studies should use standard, clearly defined exposure variables to strengthen understanding of the relationship between rainfall and diarrheal illness. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP6181.

Spatiotemporal Error in Rainfall Data: Consequences for Epidemiologic Analysis of Waterborne Diseases.

The relationship between rainfall, especially extreme rainfall, and increases in waterborne infectious diseases is widely reported in the literature. Most of this research, however, has not formally considered the impact of exposure measurement error contributed by the limited spatiotemporal fidelity of precipitation data. Here, we evaluate bias in effect estimates associated with exposure misclassification due to precipitation data fidelity, using extreme rainfall as an example. We accomplished this via a simulation study, followed by analysis of extreme rainfall and incident diarrheal disease in an epidemiologic study in Ecuador. We found that the limited fidelity typical of spatiotemporal rainfall data sets biases effect estimates towards the null. Use of spatial interpolations of rain-gauge data or satellite data biased estimated health effects due to extreme rainfall (occurrence) and wet conditions (accumulated totals) downwards by 35%-45%. Similar biases were evident in the Ecuadorian case study analysis, where spatial incompatibility between exposed populations and rain gauges resulted in the association between extreme rainfall and diarrheal disease incidence being approximately halved. These findings suggest that investigators should pay greater attention to limitations in using spatially heterogeneous environmental data sets to assign exposures in epidemiologic research.

Addressing rainfall data selection uncertainty using connections between rainfall and streamflow.

Studies of the hydroclimate at regional scales rely on spatial rainfall data products, derived from remotely-sensed (RS) and in-situ (IS, rain gauge) observations. Because regional rainfall cannot be directly measured, spatial data products are biased. These biases pose a source of uncertainty in environmental analyses, attributable to the choices made by data-users in selecting a representation of rainfall. We use the rainforest-savanna transition region in Brazil to show differences in the statistics describing rainfall across nine RS and interpolated-IS daily rainfall datasets covering the period of 1998-2013. These differences propagate into estimates of temporal trends in monthly rainfall and descriptive hydroclimate indices. Rainfall trends from different datasets are inconsistent at river basin scales, and the magnitude of index differences is comparable to the estimated bias in global climate model projections. To address this uncertainty, we evaluate the correspondence of different rainfall datasets with streamflow from 89 river basins. We demonstrate that direct empirical comparisons between rainfall and streamflow provide a method for evaluating rainfall dataset performance across multiple areal (basin) units. These results highlight the need for users of rainfall datasets to quantify this "data selection uncertainty" problem, and either justify data use choices, or report the uncertainty in derived results.