Search

Abstract Background Influenza outbreaks have occurred frequently these years, especially in the summer of 2022 when the number of influenza cases in southern provinces of China increased abnormally. However, the exact evidence of the driving factors involved in the prodrome period is unclear, posing great difficulties for early and accurate prediction in practical work. Methods In order to avoid the serious interference of strict prevention and control measures on the analysis of influenza influencing factors during the COVID-19 epidemic period, only the impact of meteorological and air quality factors on influenza A (H3N2) in Xiamen during the non coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) period (2013/01/01-202/01/24) was analyzed using the distribution lag non-linear model. Phylogenetic analysis of influenza A (H3N2) during 2013–2022 was also performed. Influenza A (H3N2) was predicted through a random forest and long short-term memory (RF-LSTM) model via actual and forecasted meteorological and influenza A (H3N2) values. Results Twenty nine thousand four hundred thirty five influenza cases were reported in 2022, accounting for 58.54% of the total cases during 2013–2022. A (H3N2) dominated the 2022 summer epidemic season, accounting for 95.60%. The influenza cases in the summer of 2022 accounted for 83.72% of the year and 49.02% of all influenza reported from 2013 to 2022. Among them, the A (H3N2) cases in the summer of 2022 accounted for 83.90% of all A (H3N2) reported from 2013 to 2022. Daily precipitation(20–50 mm), relative humidity (70–78%), low (≤ 3 h) and high (≥ 7 h) sunshine duration, air temperature (≤ 21 °C) and O3 concentration (≤ 30 µg/m3, > 85 µg/m3) had significant cumulative effects on influenza A (H3N2) during the non-COVID-19 period. The daily values of PRE, RHU, SSD, and TEM in the prodrome period of the abnormal influenza A (H3N2) epidemic (19–22 weeks) in the summer of 2022 were significantly different from the average values of the same period from 2013 to 2019 (P

Abstract Objective At different times, public health faces various challenges and the degree of intervention measures varies. The research on the impact and prediction of meteorology factors on influenza is increasing gradually, however, there is currently no evidence on whether its research results are affected by different periods. This study aims to provide limited evidence to reveal this issue. Methods Daily data on influencing factors and influenza in Xiamen were divided into three parts: overall period (phase AB), non-COVID-19 epidemic period (phase A), and COVID-19 epidemic period (phase B). The association between influencing factors and influenza was analysed using generalized additive models (GAMs). The excess risk (ER) was used to represent the percentage change in influenza as the interquartile interval (IQR) of meteorology factors increases. The 7-day average daily influenza cases were predicted using the combination of bi-directional long short memory (Bi-LSTM) and random forest (RF) through multi-step rolling input of the daily multifactor values of the previous 7-day. Results In periods A and AB, air temperature below 22 °C was a risk factor for influenza. However, in phase B, temperature showed a U-shaped effect on it. Relative humidity had a more significant cumulative effect on influenza in phase AB than in phase A (peak: accumulate 14d, AB: ER = 281.54, 95% CI = 245.47 ~ 321.37; A: ER = 120.48, 95% CI = 100.37 ~ 142.60). Compared to other age groups, children aged 4–12 were more affected by pressure, precipitation, sunshine, and day light, while those aged ≥ 13 were more affected by the accumulation of humidity over multiple days. The accuracy of predicting influenza was highest in phase A and lowest in phase B. Conclusions The varying degrees of intervention measures adopted during different phases led to significant differences in the impact of meteorology factors on influenza and in the influenza prediction. In association studies of respiratory infectious diseases, especially influenza, and environmental factors, it is advisable to exclude periods with more external interventions to reduce interference with environmental factors and influenza related research, or to refine the model to accommodate the alterations brought about by intervention measures. In addition, the RF-Bi-LSTM model has good predictive performance for influenza.