Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Apr 5;16(4):e0249199. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249199

Impact of different heat wave definitions on daily mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal

Mbaye Faye 1,*, Abdoulaye Dème 2, Abdou Kâ Diongue 1, Ibrahima Diouf 3
Editor: Shamsuddin Shahid4
PMCID: PMC8021182  PMID: 33819272

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study is to find the most suitable heat wave definition among 15 different ones and to evaluate its impact on total, age-, and gender-specific mortality for Bandafassi, Senegal.

Methods

Daily weather station data were obtained from Kedougou situated at 17 km from Bandafassi from 1973 to 2012. Poisson generalized additive model (GAM) and distributed lag non-linear model (DLNM) are used to investigate the effect of heat wave on mortality and to evaluate the nonlinear association of heat wave definitions at different lag days, respectively.

Results

Heat wave definitions, based on three or more consecutive days with both daily minimum and maximum temperatures greater than the 90th percentile, provided the best model fit. A statistically significant increase in the relative risk (RRs 1.4 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.2–1.6), 1.7 (95% CI: 1.5–1.9), 1.21 (95% CI: 1.08–1.3), 1.2 (95% CI: 1.04–1.5), 1.5 (95% CI: 1.3–1.8), 1.4 (95% CI: 1.2–1.5), 1.5 (95% CI: 1.07–1.6), and 1.5 (95% CI: 1.3–1.8)) of total mortality was observed for eight definitions. By using the definition based on the 90th percentile of minimum and maximum temperature with a 3-day duration, we also found that females and people aged ≥ 55 years old were at higher risks than males and other different age groups to heat wave related mortality.

Conclusion

The impact of heat waves was associated with total-, age-, gender-mortality. These results are expected to be useful for decision makers who conceive of public health policies in Senegal and elsewhere. Climate parameters, including temperatures and humidity, could be used to forecast heat wave risks as an early warning system in the area where we conduct this research. More broadly, our findings should be highly beneficial to climate services, researchers, clinicians, end-users and decision-makers.

Introduction

Climate change poses major challenges to public health. A heat wave is an extreme weather phenomenon in meteorology that can directly or indirectly affect human health [1, 2]. The impact of heat waves on human health caused 70,000 excess deaths in Europe during the month of August 2003 [3, 4], 696 excess deaths in July 1995 in Chicago [5], 55,000 excess deaths in Russia in the summer of 2010 [6]. Three heatwaves occurred in Brisbane, Australia (January 2000; December 2001 and February 2004) and 51,233 deaths were recorded during the whole study period [7]. The Pakistan extreme heat wave of 2017 caused deaths of thousands of people [8]. A recent study in Istanbul, Turkey, suggests that the excess deaths, estimated at 419, were observed during the three heat wave episodes in 2015, 2016, and 2017 with increased risk of 11%, 6% and 21% respectively for each heatwave [9].

While heat waves that impact public health have been widely addressed in developed countries especially since the deadly heatwave that hit western Europe during the summer of 2003, no effort has been made to detect them and evaluate their impacts in developing countries, particularly in Africa where climate is warmer. However, the impact of climate change varies across many parts in Africa [10, 11], especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, whose adaptation capacities are low. Previous research has documented the impact of various definitions of heat wave on mortality in developed countries, unlike in developing countries where only a few studies have focused on single cities [12, 13]. Although heat wave definitions vary across world, as this definition depends on climatic zone, duration of heat wave, and metric of temperature and humidity and even winds in a lesser extent, some invariable metrics remain. To quantitatively reflect a heat wave event, the definition of heat wave should be complemented by the characterization of the following four metrics: (1) Magnitude: it should be computed based on an index or a set of indices of thermal condition(s) exceeding certain threshold(s), (2) Duration: which involves the computation of the persistence of a heat wave and should be based on recording the start time and the end time of the event, (3) Severity: it is a measurement method which integrates two aspects of the event, its magnitude and its persistence, and (4) Extent: it is computed to inform on the geographical area affected and the widespread the heat wave. Few researchers use hot days and nights [14, 15] as metrics of temperature, to define heat wave; they propose relative threshold or absolute threshold (fixed threshold) [16, 17]. Another study, conducted in West Africa, has used temperature ≥ 90th percentile of both minimum and maximum temperature [18]. Some other studies have considered different types of definitions of heat wave and have examined the impact of heat waves on public health particularly and on mortality [19, 20]. A previous study used the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) to determine the most appropriate definition of heat wave and identified the people who were sensitive to the first, second, and third heat wave [21]. A number of studies investigated cause-, age-, or gender-specific and heat-related mortality relationships, and found that the elderly subpopulation was more vulnerable and sensitivity by gender differed by region [22, 23]. Additionally, many previous studies showed that the relative risk mortality was higher for females [19, 20, 24, 25] and the identified the elderly as the most vulnerable group to heat wave [20, 26]. Many studies identified, various time lag effects [27, 28], and revealed that the relation between heat wave and mortality appeared immediately (lag0) [16] or was observed after some delay. The study periods used differs around the world and includes hot seasons, summer season, warm season, or the whole year. In this study, we used the duration of heat waves and tested the percentile threshold approach. Different studies have applied various methods, including time-series analyses [29], both time-series analyses and meta-analysis [16], both systematic review and meta-analysis [30], case-crossover [31], Bayesian hierarchical models [19], and distributed lag non-linear model [32], quantile regression forests [28], and general circulation models [33]. A recent international scale study, using different heat wave definitions, found that people who live in moderate cold and moderate hot areas seem to be more susceptible to heat-related mortality than people who live in cold and hot areas [16]. However, a heat wave generally corresponds to a prolonged period of particularly high or extreme temperatures. Most studies use the daily maximum temperature [28, 3337] or separately analyze daily minimum and maximum temperatures [3842]. As highlighted by Perkins (2015) [43] these definitions have some common characteristics: temperature is always used in a raw or processed form, most often combined with a percentile-type threshold, and often based on a minimum duration of the heat wave.

In this present study, we aimed to use fifteen types of heat wave definitions (using both minimum and maximum temperature as an indicator), to identify an appropriate definition of heat wave, and to evaluate the impact of heat waves on mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal. Even these definitions are not specifically designed for health impacts, the detected heat waves are expected to be dangerous for public health. Currently, heat and-health warning systems do not exist at city level in Senegal. However, the results of this study are also aimed at developing the first heat warning system to reduce the heat related health exposure in Bandafassi.

The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 deals with the materials and methods. Section 3 delienates the results. Section 4 is devoted to the discussion of the findings, followed by a conclusion in section 5.

Materials and methods

Ethics statement

The full name of the institutional review board that reviewed our specific study for approval is the Bandafassi Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS). We confirm that this study was approved.

Study area

The Bandafassi area is located in Senegal, at 12.53° N, 12.32° W, with altitude ranging from 60 m to 426 m above the sea level mean. It is located in the region of Kedougou, in Eastern Senegal (Fig 1), near the border between Senegal, Mali and Guinea. The Bandafassi area is about 25 km long by 25 km large and with a total area of 600 km2. It sits within the Sudanian savanna ecological zone. The climate is characterized by two seasons: a rainy season, from June to October, and a dry season, from November to May, with an average of rainfall of about 1,097 mm per year during the period 1984–1995. In Bandafassi, the highest minimum temperature and the maximum temperature generally are 36°C and 49°C respectively. The Bandafassi area is about 500 km distant from the capital Dakar. Kedougou is one of the warmest regions of the country during the dry season, with a bimodal annual cycle of temperature. During the rainy season, the temperature decreases significantly due to the landsurface cooling and the cloudy conditions associated with the large amounts of precipitation. Its climate ranges between Sudano-Sahelian and Sudano-Guinean. The peak rainfal is recorded in August; it can reach up to 200 mm during this month. The rainy season lasts 4 to 5 months, and it usually starts in May or June and ends in October [44]. The relative humidity is consistently high during the rainy season, peaking between August and October. However, the description is based on African meteorologists’ practices which meets Köppens’s classification [45].

Fig 1. Meteorological observation station.

Fig 1

The map shows the location of the station used in this study. We have marked the red square to highlight Bandafassi station. (https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/).

Data collection

We collected daily weather station data from Kedougou situated at 17 km from Bandafassi. The variables included daily minimum, maximum, and mean temperatures (°C), dew point temperature (°C), wind speed (m/s), and precipitation (mm) from 1973 to 2012 period.

We obtained daily mortality count data from the Bandafassi Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS) for the same period, and included the date of death, age, gender and cause of death classified by the 10th Revision of the International Classification of Disease (ICD 10) code. We stratified mortality into two different groups based on gender (male and female) and age (0–5, 6–54, and ≥ 55 years old).

Our study has some limitations. Firstly, one rural area was considered, which suggests avoiding to generalizing the proposed heat wave definition in this study to other geographic areas. Secondly, we did not fully classify nor clarify the cause-specific deaths in our data. Air pollution is not available in our database that is why we did not take this variable into account through this study, and this is consistent with one previous study [46].

Heat wave definition

There is no worldwide consensus on a heat wave definition, although several studies have proposed various definitions for heat waves based on metrics and threshold temperatures, and durations [13, 20]. Globally, heat wave definitions are based on the temperature metrics, absolute or relative temperature threshold within consecutive days.

We combined both daily minimum and maximum temperature [8, 4751] as an indicator to define a heat wave and to assess the impact on mortality. Heat wave definition is characterized by intensity, frequency, duration, and timing in the season [2, 15, 21, 51, 52]. In the scientific literature, previous studies have used fifteen types of definitions of heat waves depending on diverse temperature metrics (e.g., minimum, maximum or mean temperature, or apparent temperature), duration (≥2, ≥3 and ≥ 4), and absolute or relative temperature threshold (87th, 90th, 92th, 95th, 97th, 98th, 99th percentile) [21, 53].

In this study, we used the fifteen types of definitions of heat waves by combining relative thresholds (87th, 90th, 92th, 95th, 97th percentile of both daily minimum and maximum temperature) and duration (≥ 3, ≥ 4 and ≥ 5) (Table 1).

Table 1. Summary statistics of heat wave days based on different duration (≥ 3, ≥ 4, ≥ 5 days) and intensity (87th, 90th, 92th, 95th, 97th), and the total number of days from 1973 to 2012.

Heat wave name Heat wave definition Heat wave days
HWD_87P_3day 87th percentile with 3 days duration 158
HWD_87P_4day 87th percentile with 4 days duration 105
HWD_87P_5day 87th percentile with 5 days duration 70
HWD_90P_3day 90th percentile with 3 days duration 95
HWD_90P_4day 90th percentile with 4 days duration 55
HWD_90P_5day 90th percentile with 5 days duration 32
HWD_92P_3day 92th percentile with 3 days duration 75
HWD_92P_4day 92th percentile with 4 days duration 41
HWD_92P_5day 92th percentile with 5 days duration 22
HWD_95P_3day 95th percentile with 3 days duration 16
HWD_95P_4day 95th percentile with 4 days duration 5
HWD_95P_5day 95th percentile with 5 days duration 2
HWD_97P_3day 97th percentile with 3 days duration 4
HWD_97P_4day 97th percentile with 4 days duration 0
HWD_97P_5day 97th percentile with 5 days duration 0

Table 1 provides the different duration and intensity. The heat wave day of the 87th temperature percentile with duration ≥ 3 days in Bandafassi is higher than the combination of the other durations and intensities. We observed that, if the intensity is high, the duration increases, the number of heat wave days decreases as well.

Statistical analysis

We also used the Poisson generalized additive model (GAM) [54] to assess the effect of heat wave on mortality. The daily mortality count follows the Poisson distribution model. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using GAMs. The GAM model was given as follows:

lnE(Yt)=β+S(DOYt)+DOWt+Yeart+S(Tt,df)+HWt+εt (1)

E(Yt) is the expected daily mortality counts on day t, β is the intercept, DOYt represents day of year, DOWt is the categorical variable for day of the week, Yeart represents a long-term trend, Tt is a temperature metric for a specific lag from a lag day t, the degree of freedom (df) in the spline smoothing function of temperature was 5 according to Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) [55], HWt is a binary variable, which equals to 0 for non-heat wave days and 1 for heat wave days, for under different heat wave definition, εt is the statistical error, t is the day of observation, and S() denotes the cubic smoothing spline.

The Distributed Lag Non-linear Model (DLNM) was used to evaluate the nonlinear association of heat wave definition at different lag days [56, 57]. A maximum lag of 25 days was utilized as sufficient length of time to simultaneously estimate of the non-linear and delayed effects of heat wave on mortality. The DLNM model used a “cross-basis” function, which allows simultaneous estimation of the non-linear effects across lag [58]. A natural spline cubic DLNM was adopted to capture the non-linear relationship between the covariate and dependent variable. The model structure is as follows:

YtPoisson(μt)
ln(μt)=α+ns(DOYt)+DOWt+ns(Yeart)+ns(Tt,df=5)+cb(HWt,lag)+εt (2)

where t denotes the day of the observation, Yt is the number of deaths on day t, μt is the mean mortality count for day t, α denotes intercept term, DOYt means the day of year, DOWt is the categorical variable for day of the week, Yeart represents a long-term trend, Tt is a temperature metric for a specific lag from a lag day t, the degree of freedom (df) is chosen by the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), HWt represents the heat wave on day t, εt is the statistical error, ns() denotes the natural cubic spline, and cb() means cross-basis function.

R software version 3.2.2, with the mgcv and the “dlnm” package [59], was used for all statistical analysis and figures.

Results

Table 2 provides the summary of the statistic of the demographic characteristic of daily mortality and meteorological factors in Bandafassi. During the study period 1973–2012, the total number was 6,684 and the average daily all, male, female, 0–5 years, 6–54 years, 55 and more years mortality count were 0.27, 0.14, 0.12, 0.078, 0.046, 0.15, respectively. In the same period, the average daily minimum, mean, maximum temperature were 22.7°C (range from 10°C to 36°C), 29.5°C (range from 16.1°C to 39.8°C), 35.4°C (range from 17.5°C to 49°C), respectively.

Table 2. Summary demographic characteristic daily mortality and meteorological factors in Bandafassi, Senegal (1973–2012).

Variables Mean (SD) Min Max
Demographic characteristic
All 0.27 (1.79) 0 21
Male 0.14 (0.96) 0 12
Female 0.12 (0.85) 0 11
0–5 years 0.078 (0.54) 0 7
6–54 years 0.046 (0.30) 0 4
55+ years 0.15 (1.06) 0 13
Meteorological factor
Minimum temperature (°C) 22.7 (3.1) 10 36
Mean temperature (°C) 29.5 (2.7) 16.1 39.8
Maximum temperature (°C) 35.4 (3.1) 17.5 49

From Fig 2, we observed the daily number of deaths and the daily minimum and maximum temperatures during the four-decade period (1973–2012) in Bandafassi. The mortality data depicted five major peaks, the first one appeared on the 27th April 1980, the second is observed on the 4th May 2005, the third is obtained on the 10th May 2006, the fourth occurred on the 6th March 2010 and the last one became visible on the 17th April 2010.

Fig 2.

Fig 2

The daily number of deaths (red line), the daily minimum temperature (green line), and the daily maximum temperature (blue line) during the period 1973–2012 in Bandafassi.

Table 3 displays the sum of AIC values of all gender- and age-specific mortality for different heat wave definitions. In Bandafassi, the heat wave defined by threshold of 90th percentile of temperature with duration ≥3 days produced the lowest AIC value 44,660.4.

Table 3. Value of the sum of the Akaike Information Criterion for Poisson (AIC) of heat wave days based on different duration (≥3, ≥4, ≥5 days) and intensity (87th, 90th, 92th, 95th, 97th) in Bandafassi for years 1973–2012.

Heat wave threshold
(percentile of temperature)
Value of AIC
3 days 4 days 5 days
87th 44,676.5 44,662.3 44,664.3
90th 44,660.4 44,670.2 44,677.2
92th 44,670.9 44,676.4 44,676.0
95th 44,675.5 44,678 44,677.1
97th 44,675.8 44,676.0 44,676.0

Table 4 gives the relative risk of heat wave days based on 15 different heat wave definitions in Bandafassi. Eight heat wave definitions (90th, 92th percentile with duration ≥ 3 days, 87th, 90th, 92th percentile with duration ≥ 4 days, and 87th, 90th, 92th percentile with duration ≥ 5 days) were statistically significant in relating total mortality to the relative risk of 1.4 (95% CI: 1.2–1.6), 1.7 (95% CI: 1.5–1.9), 1.21 (95% CI: 1.08–1.3), 1.2 (95% CI: 1.04–1.5), 1.5 (95% CI: 1.3–1.8), 1.4 (95% CI: 1.2–1.5), 1.5 (95% CI: 1.07–1.6), and 1.5 (95% CI: 1.3–1.8) for total mortality, respectively. Seven heat wave definitions (90th, 92th, 95th percentile with duration ≥ 3 days, 87th, 92th percentile with duration ≥ 4 days, and 87th, 90th percentile with duration ≥ 5 days) statistically increased the risk of female mortality given by 1.609 (95% CI: 1.33–1.88), 1.72 (95% CI: 1.45–2.005), 2.87 (95% CI: 1.9–3.8), 1.21 (95% CI: 1.039–1.39), 1.49 (95% CI: 1.14–1.83), 1.37 (95% CI: 1.16–1.59), and 1.54 (95% CI: 1.15–1.92), respectively. Seven heat wave definitions (90th, 92th, 95th percentile with duration ≥ 3 days, 87th, 92th percentile with duration ≥ 4 days, and 87th, 90th percentile with duration ≥ 5 days) significantly associated male mortality with the relative risk of 1.39 (95% CI: 1.11–1.67), 1.87 (95% CI: 1.58–2.16), 3.8 (95% CI: 2.8–4.8), 1.21 (95% CI: 1.037–1.39), 1.74 (95% CI: 1.37–2.105), 1.47 (95% CI: 1.26–1.69), and 1.709 (95% CI: 1.28–2.13), respectively. For age category-specific (0–5 years), six heat wave definitions (90th, 92th, 95th percentile with duration ≥ 3 days, 87th, 92th percentile with duration ≥ 4 days, and 87th percentile with duration ≥ 5 days) were statistically significantly associated with the risk mortality of 1.44 (95% CI: 1.17–1.7), 1.86 (95% CI: 1.58–2.13), 5.1 (95% CI: 4.1–6.2), 1.21 (95% CI: 1.039–1.38), 1.56 (95% CI: 1.21–1.91), and 1.45 (95% CI: 1.24–1.66), respectively. For people over age of 55, we found that six heat wave definitions (90th, 92th, percentile with duration ≥ 3 days, 87th, 92th percentile with duration ≥ 4 days, 87th, and 90th percentile with duration ≥ 5 days) had significant risk of mortality as follows 1.67 (95% CI: 1.31–2.031), 1.87 (95% CI: 1.5–2.23), 1.41 (95% CI: 1.15–1.66), 1.64 (95% CI: 1.19–2.097), 1.63 (95% CI: 1.32–1.94), and 1.86 (95% CI: 1.37–2.35), respectively. The relative risk among females was higher than that found for males to heat wave related mortality for the definition based on 90th temperature percentile with 3-day (produced the best model fit as judged by AIC). No significant relative risk was observed among people aged 6–54 years for all heat wave definitions. For most of the cases, the highest mortality risk was observed for 95th temperature percentile with 3-day, and 4-day. For age-specific categories, the relative risk in the population for people over the age of 55 years was larger than that of the other group. The children people aged 0–5 years are at high risk of total mortality and gender-, age-specific mortality for the heat wave definition (95th temperature percentile with duration ≥ 3 days). The results reveal that the mortality risk associated with heat wave depends on both temperature threshold and duration.

Table 4. Relative Risk (RR) of daily mortality during heat wave based in different duration (≥3, ≥4, ≥5 days) and intensities (87th, 90th, 92th, 95th, 97th) during the period 1973–2012.

Mortality 3 days 4 days 5 days
RRs 95%CI RRs 95%CI RRs 95%CI
Total
87th 1.005 (0.9–1.1) 1.21 (1.08–1.3)** 1.4 (1.2–1.5)***
90th 1.4 (1.2–1.6)*** 1.2 (1.04–1.5)* 1.5 (1.07–1.6)**
92th 1.7 (1.5–1.9)*** 1.5 (1.3–1.8)*** 1.5 (1.3–1.8)***
95th 2.9 (2.2–3.5) 1.2 (-0.27–2.8) 0.1 (-2.8–3.1)
97th ---           --- ---        --- ---        ---
Female
87th 1.0013 (0.86–1.14) 1.21 (1.039–1.39)* 1.37 (1.16–1.59)**
90th 1.609 (1.33–1.88)*** 1.38 (1.051–1.71) 1.54 (1.15–1.92)*
92th 1.72 (1.45–2.005)*** 1.49 (1.14–1.83)* 1.34 (0.9–1.78)
95th 2.87 (1.9–3.8)* 0.68 (-3.23–4.61) 0.17 (-4.7–5.1)
97th ---        --- ---        --- ---        ---
Male
87th 1.011 (0.87–1.14) 1.21 (1.037–1.39)* 1.47 (1.26–1.69)***
90th 1.39 (1.11–1.67)* 1.22 (0.87–1.57) 1.709 (1.28–2.13)*
92th 1.87 (1.58–2.16)*** 1.74 (1.37–2.105)** 1.52 (1.08–1.97)
95th 3.8 (2.8–4.8)** 4.056 (1.7–6.41) 0.17 (-4.7–5.1)
97th 1.46 (0.05–2.88) ---        --- ---        ---
0–5 years

87th

1.029 (0.9–1.15)

1.21 (1.039–1.38)*

1.45 (1.24–1.66)***

90th

1.44 (1.17–1.7)**

1.2 (0.87–1.53)

1.4 (1.001–1.85)
92th
1.86 (1.58–2.13)***
1.56 (1.21–1.91)*
1.29 (0.8–1.74)
95th
5.1 (4.1–6.2)**
0.56 (-6.5–7.6)
---        ---
97th ---        --- ---        --- ---        ---
6–54 years
87th 0.85 (0.65–1.064) 1.051 (0.78–1.31) 1.206 (0.902–1.51)
90th 1.405 (0.904–1.907) 1.47 (0.89–2.057) 1.74 (1.107–2.38)
92th 1.52 (1.037–2.018) 1.68 (1.107–2.27) 1.64 (0.98–2.29)
95th 1.31 (-0.69–3.31) 2.61 (-0.34–5.57) 0.62 (-3.44–4.69)
97th ---        --- ---        --- ---        ---
55 years
87th 1.12 (0.92–1.33) 1.41 (1.15–1.66)** 1.63 (1.32–1.94)**
90th 1.67 (1.31–2.031)** 1.39 (0.96–1.82) 1.86 (1.37–2.35)*
92th 1.87 (1.5–2.23)*** 1.64 (1.19–2.097)* 1.54 (0.95–2.35)
95th 2.37 (1.29–3.45) 2.83 (0.13–5.54) ---        ---
97th ---        --- ---        --- ---        ---

--- = not enough data to generate a reliable estimate

***p-value < 0.001

**p-value < 0.01

*p-value < 0.05.

Fig 3 reveals the mortality risk of heat wave definition using the 90th percentile of temperature with duration ≥ 3 days for various lagged days. We consider the lag distribution from lag 0 days to lag 25 days. The graph shows that the relative risk of all mortality, gender-, and age-specific was below 1.0 in lag 0 days. An increase of the relative risk was first observed, and it was followed by a decline as seen in Fig 3. We observed significant association for all mortality at lags 6–12 days, although the highest relative risk appeared at lag 8 days and lag 9 days respectively (RR = 1.11; 95% CI: 1.23–1.35 and RR = 1.13; 95% CI: 1.25–1.36). We found significant associations among male mortality at lags 11–18 days, and no effect thereafter. For female mortality, the associations significant occurred at lags 7–14 days. Among the children aged 0–5 years, there was statistically significant at lags 8–14 days. The people aged 55 years old or above were significantly higher risk of heat wave associated mortality at lags 7–16 days. We observed an insignificant associated for the people aged 6–54 years at different lags.

Fig 3. Relative risk of mortality on the lag distribution of heat wave stratified by gender, and age based on the definition ≥90th percentile with duration ≥3 consecutive days as heat wave.

Fig 3

Discussion

This is the first study which examines the impact of different heat wave definitions on mortality in Senegal as far as we know. Although, different definitions for heat wave have been documented around the world, for example in America, Europe and Asia (especially in China). Zhang et al. (2017) [20] used 45 definitions of heat wave by combining five temperature thresholds and three temperature indicators (90th, 92.5th, 95th, 97.5th and 99th percentile of daily mean temperature, minimum temperature and maximum temperature) with duration (≥ 2, ≥ 3 and ≥ 4 days) to assess the impact of heat wave under different definitions on non-accidental mortality, and found that heat wave defined by daily mean temperature ≥ 99th percentile and duration ≥ 3 days showed the best model fit among the 46 heat wave definitions. Seposo et al. (2017) [32] developed 15 heat wave definitions combining different intensities (90th, 95th, 97th, 98th and 99th temperature percentile) with heat wave duration (> 2, > 4, and > 7 consecutive days) as heat wave candidates. In this study, we used 15 definitions of heat wave by combining temperature metrics (both temperature maximum and minimum), temperature threshold (87th, 90th, 92th, 95th, 97th percentile) and duration (≥ 3, ≥ 4 and ≥ 5 days) in Bandafassi during the period of 1973–2012. Based on these different heat wave definitions, the best model fit was produced by heat wave definition using both minimum and maximum temperature ≥ 90th percentile with duration ≥ 3 consecutive days (judged by Akaike Information Criterion (AIC)). This result is consistent with numerous previous studies such as [48].

To define a heat wave, many studies used relative threshold [16, 21] while others used only absolute threshold [12]. Similar methods were observed in this study. In the literature, we found numerous studies using both relative and absolute threshold. For example, Tong et al. (2010) [7] used 10 heat wave definitions, including both absolute and relatives ones [60], in contrast Chen et al. (2015) [53] identified 15 different heat wave definitions, including both relative and absolute threshold [53]. Our study used only relative threshold. The age at death was stratified into three groups which considered young children (0–5 years old), people aged from 6 to 54 years and elderly (≥ 55 years old).The age ranges are justified by Table 2 in the work of Pison and Langaney (1984) [61], they found that the probability of death decreases with age up to 5 years old then increases until around 54 years old and then increases again. In the literature, the age group differs, each study gives its own subgroup. Mortality risk varied significantly by age and gender between different heat wave definitions. We observed a small age-specific difference, the elderly (≥ 55 years old) are more fragile population than young children (0–5 years old). Even young children are potentially at great risk for heat wave as evidenced in a previous review [62]. We also found that the elderly (≥ 55 years old) were more susceptible to heat wave effects, which is consistent with earlier work [53]. Our findings show that the relative risk among 6–54 year age groups was statistically insignificant for the different heat wave definitions considered as shown in Table 4. For age-specific, the highest mortality risk was observed among elderly people at the heat wave definition using daily minimum temperature of 28°C (≥ 95th percentile) and daily maximum temperature of 40.72°C (≥ 95th percentile) with a duration ≥ 3 days.

It was also found that the relative risk mortality among females were higher than for males in the heat wave definition based on 90th temperature percentile with 3-day and 4-day duration, and this is in line with a number of previous studies [22, 24]. In contrast, the relative risk mortality among males was higher than females by the definition combining threshold (87th, 92th, 95th, 97th percentile) with duration (≥ 3, ≥ 4 and ≥ 5 days) and 90th temperature percentile with 5-day duration. These results are consistent with some previous studies [32]. The effect of the heat on people living in Bandafassi is not immediate as evidenced in most countries worldwide but delayed after a few days. These results are in agreement with numerous previous studies [7, 16, 63, 64]. The reason is that, possibly due to their greater physiological adaptation to high temperatures. For gender-specific, the highest mortality risk appeared among males at the heat wave definitions using a daily minimum temperature of 28°C (≥ 95th percentile) and daily maximum temperature of 40.72°C (≥ 95th percentile) with the duration ≥ 4 days. Under different heat wave definitions, certain extant studies used two or four days as the duration without proof of their choice. In our work, we chose 3-, 4-, or 5-days as the duration to define heat wave, because of the significance of the heat wave duration. As it is shown in Table 4, the 3-, 4-, and 5-days duration and 97th temperature percentile definition don’t produce a reliable estimate because there is insufficient data except for the 3-day duration and 97th temperature percentile among male risk mortality.

In Fig 3, we observed the short-term mortality displacement also known as harvesting [63, 64]. The harvesting occurs when a positive association at short lags is followed by a negative association at longer lags which should suggest a ‘deficit’ of mortality [65]. In the 6 to 54-year age group, we observed negative mortality at lags 0–6 days, a positive association from lags 7–11 days followed by a negative association at lags 12–25 days. Among those 0–5 years of age, negative mortality occurred across lags of 0–5 days, we observed a positive association from lags 6–18 days followed by a negative association at lags 19–25 days. Among the people aged 55 years and over, a presence of negative mortality appeared from lags 0–4 days, a positive association from lags 5–18 days followed by a negative association at lags 19–25 days are shown. For males, we observed a clear decline in mortality around lags of 0–4 days, an increase in mortality across lags of 5–16 days followed by a decrease in mortality across lag of 17–25 days. For females, we observed negative mortality around lag of 0–8 days, a positive association around lags of 9–19 days followed by a negative association at lags 20–25 days. For all deaths, a decline in mortality occurred across a lag of 0–1 days, we found a positive association from lags 2–18 days followed by a negative association at lags 19–25 days. These results are displayed in Fig 3, which shows similar patterns to the results obtained by a previous study [66]. For heat wave definition, a number of previous studies applied a combination of intensity and duration [67, 68]. In this paper, we did not evaluate the cause-specific of deaths which is not compatible with other numerous previous studies [24, 69].

Conclusions

Considering 15 definitions of heat wave, we found that using both the minimum and maximum temperatures threshold of ≥ 90th percentile with duration ≥ 3 days was the most suitable definition to capture the impact of heat wave on mortality in Bandafassi during the period of 1973–2012. The findings of our work show also that elderly people (≥ 55 years old) are frail to heat-related mortality and females seem to be at higher risk than males to the mortality impact of heat wave definition based on 90th temperature percentile with 3-day in Bandafassi. For the sub-population between 6 and 54 years old, the relative risk values can be high, but they are not statistically significant, regardless of the analyzed percentile and heat wave duration. These results are expected to be useful for decision makers who plan public health measures in Senegal and elsewhere. Climate parameters including temperatures and humidity could be used to forecast heat wave risks over our area study for an early warning system. More broadly, our findings should be crucial for climate services, researchers, clinicians, end-users and decision-makers.

Supporting information

S1 Dataset

(CSV)

S1 Fig. Relative Risk (RR) of mortality on the lag distribution of heat wave stratified by gender, and age based on the definition ≥ 90th percentile of apparent temperature with duration ≥ 3 consecutive days as heat wave.

(DOCX)

S2 Fig. Annual cycle of Tmax (maximum temperature) and Tappmax (maximum apparent temperature) in Kedougou (1973–2012).

(DOCX)

S3 Fig. Annual cycle of Tmean (mean temperature) and Tapp (mean apparent temperature) in Kedougou (1973–2012).

(DOCX)

S4 Fig. Annual cycle of Tmin (minimum temperature) and Tappmin (minimum apparent temperature) in Kedougou (1973–2012).

(DOCX)

S1 Table. Displays the comparison (between apparent temperature and ambient temperature) of the sum of AIC values of all gender- and age- specific mortality for different heat wave definitions.

Ambient temperature is the best predicteur of mortality in our study in term of AIC because the results with ambient temperature produced the lowest AIC value.

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Relative Risk (RR) of daily mortality during heat wave based in different duration (≥3, ≥4, ≥5 days) and intensities (87th, 90th, 92th, 95th, 97th percentile of apparent temperature) during the period 1973–2012.

(DOCX)

Data Availability

The authors cannot provide the house location data and other identifying information, which would be against the ethical agreement with participants. However, for risk factor data analyses the data are fully available. All additional data can be made available by contacting the authors Mbaye Faye (faye.mbaye@ugb.edu.sn) and/or Abdou Kâ Diongue (abdou.diongue@ugb.edu.sn).

Funding Statement

This research was funded by ACASIS project (http://www.agence-nationale-recherche.fr/Projet-ANR-13-SENV-0007). ACASIS project had access to the Bandafassi Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS) and provided us daily mortality count data, but had no other role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Azhar GS, Mavalankar D, Nori-Sarma A, Rajiva A, Dutta P, (2014) Heat-Related Mortality in India: Excess All-Cause Mortality Associated with the 2010 Ahmedabad HeatWave. PLoS ONE 9(3): e91831. 10.1371/journal.pone.0091831 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.McGregor GR, Bessemoulin P, Ebi K, Menne B(2015) Heatwaves and Health: Guidance on Warning-System Development. World Meteorological Organization (WMO-No. 1142) and World Health Organization, 2015. Available from: https://www.who.int/globalchange/publications/heatwaves-health-guidance/en/ [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Robine JM, Cheung SLK, Le Roy S, Van Oyen H, Griffiths C, Michel JP, et al. (2008) Death toll exceeded 70,000 in Europe during the summer of 2003. C. R. Biologies 331, 171–178. 10.1016/j.crvi.2007.12.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Basara JB, Basara HG, Illston BG, Crawford KC (2010) The Impact of the Urban Heat Island during an Intense HeatWave in Oklahoma City. Advances in Meteorology. 10.1155/2010/230365 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Whitman S, Good G, Donoghue ER, Benbow N, Shou W (1997) Mortality in Chicago Attributed to the July 1995 Heat Wave. American Journal of Public Health 87, 9, 1515–1518. 10.2105/ajph.87.9.1515 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Barriopedro D, Fischer EM, Luterbacher J, Trigo RM, García-Herrera R (2011) The Hot Summer of 2010: Redrawing the Temperature Record Map of Europe. Science 332, 220. 10.1126/science.1201224 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Tong S, Wang XY, Guo Y (2012) Assessing the Short-Term Effects of Heatwaves on Mortality and Morbidity in Brisbane, Australia: Comparison of Case-Crossover and Time Series Analyses. PLoS ONE 7(5): e37500. 10.1371/journal.pone.0037500 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Khan N, Shahid S, bin Ismail T, Wang X.-J, (2018. a). Spatial distribution of unidirectional trends in temperature and temperature extremes in Pakistan. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 1–15. 10.1007/s00704-018-2520-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Can G, Sahin U, Sayili U, Dubé M, Kara B (2019) Excess Mortality in Istanbul during Extreme Heat Waves between 2013 and 2017. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16, 4348. 10.3390/ijerph16224348 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Collier P, Conway G, Venables T (2008) Climate change and Africa. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 24, 337–353. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23606648 [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Serdeczny O, Adams S, Baarsch F, Coumou D, Robinson A (2016) Climate change impacts in Sub-Saharan Africa: from physical changes to their social repercussions. REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE 15, 1436–3798. 10.1007/s10113-015-0910-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Sun X, Sun Q, Zhou X, Li X, Yang M, Yu A, et al. (2014) Heat wave impact on mortality in Pudong New Area, China in 2013. Science of the Total Environment 493, 789–794. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.06.042 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Zeng W, Lao X, Rutherford S, Xu Y, Xu X, Lin H, et al. (2014) The effect of heat waves on mortality and effect modifiers in four communities of Guangdong Province, China. Science of the Total Environment 482–483, 214–221. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.02.049 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Yi L, Yihui D, Weijing L (2017) Observed Trends in Various Aspects of Compound Heat Waves across China from 1961 to 2015. Journal of Meteorological Research. 10.1007/s13351-017-6150-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Habeeb D, Vargo J, Stone B Jr, (2005) Rising heat wave trends in large US cities. Nat. Hazards 76: 1651–1665. 10.1007/s11069-014-1563-z [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Guo Y, Gasparrini A, Armstrong BG, Tawatsupa B, Tobias A, Lavigne E, et al. (2017) Heat Wave and Mortality: A Multicountry, Multicommunity Study. Environmental Health Perspectives 087006, 229–240. 10.1289/EHP1026 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Smith TT, Zaitchik BF, Gohlke JM (2013) Heat waves in the United States: definitions, patterns and trends. Clim. Change 118(3–4): 811–825. 10.1007/s10584-012-0659-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Moron V, Oueslati B, Pohl B, Rome S, Janicot S (2016) Trends of mean temperatures and warm extremes in northern tropical Africa (1961–2014) from observed and PPCA-reconstructed time series. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres 5298–5319. 10.1002/2015JD024303 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Son JY, Lee JT, Anderson GB, Bell ML (2010) The Impact of Heat Waves on Mortality in Seven Major Cities in Korea. Environmental Health Perspectives 120, 4:566–571. 10.1289/ehp.1103759 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Zhang Y, Feng R, Wu R, Zhong P, Tan X, Wu K, et al. (2017) Global climate change: impact of heat waves under different definitions on daily mortality in Wuhan, China. Global Health Research and Policy 2:10. 10.1186/s41256-017-0030-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Tian Z, Li S, Zhang J, Guo Y (2013) The Characteristic of Heat Wave Effects on Coronary Heart Disease Mortality in Beijing, China: A Time Series Study. PLoS One 8(9): e77321. 10.1371/journal.pone.0077321 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Dong W, Zeng Q, Ma Y, Li G, Pan X (2016) Impact of Heat Wave Definitions on the Added Effect of Heat Waves on Cardiovascular Mortality in Beijing, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 13, 933; 350. 10.3390/ijerph13090933 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Percic S, Kukec A, Cegnar T, Hojs A (2018) Number of Heat Wave Deaths by Diagnosis, Sex, Age Groups, and Area, in Slovenia, 2015 vs. 2003. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 15, 173. 10.3390/ijerph15010173 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Basagana X, Sartini C, Barrera-Gomez J, Dadvand P, Cunillera PDJ, Ostro B, et al. (2011) Heat Waves and Cause-specific Mortality at all Ages. Epidemiology 22, 765–772. Accessed October 31, 2020. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23048065 10.1097/EDE.0b013e31823031c5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Ma W, Zeng W, Zhou M, Wang L, Rutherford S, Lin H, et al. (2015) The short-term effect of heat waves on mortality and its modifiers in China: An analysis from 66 communities. Environment International 75, 103–109. 10.1016/j.envint.2014.11.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kysely J, Kim J(2009) Mortality during heat waves in South Korea, 1991 to 2005: How exceptional was the 1994 heat wave. CLIMATE RESEARCH 38, 105–116. 10.3354/cr00775 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Wilson LA, Morgan GG, Hanigan IC, Johnston FH, Abu-Rayya H, Broome R, et al. (2013) The impact of heat on mortality and morbidity in the Greater Metropolitan Sydney Region: a case crossover analysis. Environmental Health 12: 98. 10.1186/1476-069X-12-98 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Khan N, Shahid S, Juneng L, Ahmed K, Ismail T, Nawaz N (2019)Prediction of heat waves in Pakistan using quantile regression forests. Atmos. Res. 221, 1–11. 10.1016/j.atmosres.2019.01.024 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Sun X, Sun Q, Yang M, Zhou X, Li X, Yu A, et al. (2014) Effects of temperature and heat waves on emergency department visits and emergency ambulance dispatches in Pudong New Area, China: a time series analysis. Environmental Health 13:76. 10.1186/1476-069X-13-76 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Xu Z, Fitzgerald G, Guo Y, Jalaludin B, Tong S (2016) Impact of heatwave on mortality under different heat wave definitions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environment International 89–90, 193–203. 10.1016/j.envint.2016.02.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Wichmann J (2017) Heat effects of ambient apparent temperature on all-cause mortality in Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg, South Africa: 2006–201. Sci. Total. Environ. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.02.135 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Seposo XT, Dang TN, Honda Y (2017) Exploring the effects of high temperature on mortality in four cities in the Philippines using various heat wave definitions in different mortality subgroups. GLOBAL HEALTH ACTION, 10: 1368969. 10.1080/16549716.2017.1368969 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Khan N, Shahid S, Ahmad K, Wang X-J, (2019)Selection of GCMs for the projection of spatial distribution of heat waves in Pakistan. Atmospheric Research 233 (2020) 104688. 10.1016/j.atmosres.2019.104688 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Fischer EM, Schär C (2010) Consistent geographical patterns of changes in high-impact European heatwaves. Nat. Geosci. 3, 398–403, 10.1038/ngeo866 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Stefanon M, D’Andrea F, Drobinski P (2012) Heatwave classification over Europe and the Mediterranean region. Environ. Res. Lett. 7, 014023, 10.1088/1748-9326/7/1/014023 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Schoetter R, Cattiaux J, Douville H (2015) Changes of western European heat wave characteristics projected by the CMIP5 ensemble. Climate Dyn. 45, 1601–1616, 10.1007/s00382-014-2434-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Khan N, Shahid S, Ismail T, Ahmed K, Nawaz N, (2018. b) Trends in heat wave related indices in Pakistan. Stoch. Env. Res. Risk A. 10.1007/s00477-018-1605-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Gershunov A, Guirgis K (2012) California heat waves in the present and future. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L18710, 10.1029/2012GL052979 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Perkins SE, Alexander LV, Nairn JR (2012) Increasing frequency, intensity and duration of observed global heatwaves and warm spell. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L20714, 10.1029/2012GL053361 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Perkins SE, Alexander LV (2013) On the measurement of heat waves. J. Climate 26, 4500–4517, 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00383.1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Fontaine B, Janicot S, Monnerie PA (2013) Recent changes in air temperature, heat waves occurences, and atmospheric circulation in northern Africa. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 118, 8536–8552, 10.1002/jgrd.50667 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Mutiibwa D, Vavrus SJ, McFee SA, Albright TP (2015) Recent spatiotemporal patterns in temperature extremes across conterminous United States. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 120, 7378–7392, 10.1002/2015JD023598 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Perkins SE (2015) A review on the scientific understanding of heatwaves- Their measurement, driving mechanisms, and changes at the global scale. Atmos. Res. 164–165, 242–267, 10.1016/j.atmosres.2015.05.014 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Diouf I, Rodriguez-Fonseca B, Deme A, Caminade C, Morse AP, Cisse M, et al. (2017) Comparison of Malaria Simulations Driven by Meteorological Observations and Reanalysis Products in Senegal. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 14, 1119; 10.3390/ijerph14101119 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Cornforth R, Parker DJ, Diop-kane M, Fink AH, Lafore JP, (2019) The First Forecasters’ Handbook for West Africa. America Meteorological Society. 10.1175/BAMS-D-16-0273.1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Lee WL, Lee HA, Lim YH, Park H (2016) Added effect of heat wave on mortality in Seoul, Korea. Int. J. Biometeorol. 60, 719–726. 10.1007/s00484-015-1067-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Ahmadnezhad E, Naieni KH, Ardalan A, Mahmoudi M, Yunesian M, Naddafi K et al. (2013) Excess Mortality during Heat Waves, Tehran Iran: An Ecological Time-Series Study. Journal of Research in Health Sciences 13 1: 24–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Abatan AA, Abiodun BJ, Adefisan EA, Gutowski WJ Jr (2018) Hot days and tropical nights in Nigeria: trends and associated large-scale features. Theoretical and Applied Climatology. 10.1007/s00704-018-2713-0 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Chau PH, Chan KC, Woo J (2009) Hot weather warning might help to reduce elderly mortality in Hong Kong. Int. J. Biometeorol. 53: 461–468. 10.1007/s00484-009-0232-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Robinson PJ (2001) On the Definition of a Heat Wave. American Meteorological Society 40: 762–775. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Shafiei Shiva J, Chandler DG, Kunkel KE(2018) Localized Changes in Heat Wave Properties Across the United States. Earth’s Future. 10.1029/2018EF001085 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Beniston M, Stephenson DB, Christensen OB, Ferro CAT, Frei C, Goyette S, et al. (2007) Future extreme events in European climate: an exploration of regional climate model projections. Climatic Change 81: 71–95. 10.1007/s10584-006-9226-z [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Chen K, Bi J, Chen J, Chen X, Huang L, Zhou L (2015) Influence of heat wave definitions to the added effect of heat waves on daily mortality in Nanjing, China. Science of the Total Environment 506–507, 18–25. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.10.092 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Hastie TJ, Tibshirani RJ (1990) Generalized Additive Model, London UK: Chapman and Hall. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control. 19: 716–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Gasparrini A, Armstrong B (2011) The impact of heat waves on mortality. Epidemiology 22 (1): 68–73. 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181fdcd99 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Gao J, Sun Y, Liu Q, Zhou M, Lu Y, Li L (2015) Impact of extreme high temperature on mortality and regional level definition of heat wave: A multi-city study in China. Science of the Total Environment 505, 535–544. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.10.028 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Gasparrini A, Armstrong B, Kenward M (2010) Distributed lag non-linear models. Stat Med 29: 2224–34. 10.1002/sim.3940 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Gasparrini A (2011) Distributed Lag Linear and Non-Linear Models in R: The Package dlnm. Journal of Statistical Software 48. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Tong S, Wang XY, Barnett AG (2010) Assessment of Heat-Related Health Impacts in Brisbane, Australia: Comparison of Different Heatwave Definitions. PLoS ONE 5 (8): e12155. 10.1371/journal.pone.0012155 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Pison G, Langaney A (1984) The level and age pattern of mortality in Bandafassi (Eastern Senegal): results from a small-scale and intensive multi-round survey. PSC African Demography Working Paper Series. 11. 10.1080/0032472031000141586 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Xu Z, Sheffield PE, Su H, Wang X, Bi Y, Tong S (2013) The impact of heat waves on children’s health: a systematic review. Int. J. Biometeorol. 10.1007/s00484-013-0655-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Muggeo VM, Hajat S (2009) Modelling the non-linear multiple-lag effects of ambient temperature on mortality in Santiago and Palermo: a constrained segmented distributed lag approach. Occup. Environ. Med. 66: 584–591. 10.1136/oem.2007.038653 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Morabito M, Crisci A, Moriondo M, Profili F, Francesconi P, Trombi G, et al. (2012) Air temperature-related human health outcomes: Current impact and estimations of future risks in Central Italy. Science of the Total Environment 441: 28–40. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.09.056 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Muggeo VM (2010) Analyzing temperature effects on mortality within the R environment: the constrained segmented distributed lag parameterization. J Stat Softw 32: 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Röcklov J, Forsberg B, Meister K (2009) Winter mortality modifies the heat-mortality association the following summer. Eur Respir J 33: 245–251; 10.1183/09031936.00037808 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Baccini M, Kosatsky T, Analitis A, Anderson HR, D’Ovidio M, Menne B, et al. (2011) the PHEWE Collaborative Group: Impact of heat on mortality in 15 European cities: attributable deaths under different weather scenario. Epidemiol Community Health 65: 64–70. 10.1136/jech.2008.085639 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Anderson GB, Bell ML (2010) Heat Waves in the United States: Mortality Risk during Heat Waves and Effect Modification by Heat Wave Characteristics in 43 U.S. Communities. Environmental Health Perspectives 119, 210–218. 10.1289/ehp.1002313 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Ishigami A, Hajat S, Kovats RS, Bisanti L, Rognoni M, Russo A, et al. (2008) An ecological time-series study of heat-related mortality in three European cities. Environmental Health 7:5. 10.1186/1476-069X-7-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Shamsuddin Shahid

8 Oct 2020

PONE-D-20-27586

Impact of Different Heat Wave Definition on Daily Mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mbaye,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Both the reviewers are in favour to publish the article. However, both of them asked for few revisions. Though both of them asked for minor revision, reviewer 2 seems critical on some issues. I also agree with reviewer 2 that the literature review is not complete. Besides, author should try to highlight the novelty of the study.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 22 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Shamsuddin Shahid

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

Both the reviewers are in favour to publish the article. However, both of them asked for few revisions. Though both of them asked for minor revision, reviewer 2 seems critical on some issues. I also agree with reviewer 2 that the literature review is not complete. Besides, author should try to highlight the novelty of the study.

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

"This research was funded by ACASIS project (http://www.agence-nationalerecherche.fr/Projet-ANR-13-SENV-0007). Authors also thank Serge Janicot and Richard Lalou

for useful discussions about climate health impacts and their support through ACASIS

project."

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

"The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Please ensure that you refer to Figure 1 in your text as, if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the figure.

4. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

4.1.    You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. 

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

4.2.    If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Review Report 1 for manuscript “PONE-D-20-27586”

I have read this manuscript with great interest. The study tries to select the most suitable heat wave definition for Bandafassi, Senegal. I think this paper will please the readers of PLOS one. It used very simple methodologies. However, the discussion should be improved. It is more like a literature review. My recommendation is minor revision. Below are my comments.

L17: please, replace “the best” by “the most suitable” and add “for Bandafassi” at the end of the objective.

L26: What is CI? The reader don’t know yet its meaning yet.

L31: What is “with 3-day”? Do you mean with 3-day duration?

L37: remove “current”

L41:43: please rewrite starting from “three heat waves …. Study periods”. The sentence is misleading. Also in line 43 and 44. I think it should be “A recent study…. summaries that the excess ….. during the three heat …… 2017) showed a 11% ….. increase in risk.”

L60: start time and end time.

L119: What do you refer to in this sentence?

L135:136: move to statistical analysis

L202: coma is missing “from figure 2, we “

Figure 2: It is better to re arrange the x-axis to incremental values and add these specific days as vertical lines (using abline in R).

L215: Bold is not needed.

Page 12: Please, divide into several paragraphs.

L323: Is it the only reason? Is it or due to heat built-up in body?

L344: correct to “3 days is the most suitable (OR most representative) definition”

Good Luck

Reviewer #2: The heat wave have highest morality rate in cities while this paper only explores the rural heat wave morality. The reason is that heat wave is amplified a lot when considering the cities. I suggest the results from the cities should also be considered.

What was the base year the heat wave was defined?

The heat wave is indeed defined by a temperature, but it does not mean that the threshold temperature should be percentage based. The question is why the percentage-based threshold was used, why not a specific temperature?

Why only morality data was used why also use the morbidity data also?

What is the correlation coefficient in figure 2? I think it will give some idea between the temperature and death perhaps?

What is the novelty of the study?

The literature is not complete. Please include the papers on heat wave definition, indices and what heat waves will be in the coming decades:

-Trends in heat wave related indices in Pakistan

-Prediction of heat waves in Pakistan using quantile regression forests

-Spatial distribution of unidirectional trends in temperature and temperature extremes in Pakistan

-Selection of GCMs for the projection of spatial distribution of heat waves in Pakistan

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Mohamed Salem Nashwan

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Apr 5;16(4):e0249199. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249199.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


4 Jan 2021

November, 2020

Re: Resubmission of “ Impact of Different Heat Wave Definition on Daily Mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal”, manuscript id: PONE-D-20-27586

Dear Editor :

Thank you for the opportunity to revise our manuscript titled “ Impact of Different Heat Wave Definition on Daily Mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal”. We appreciate the careful reviews and constructive suggestions by the reviewers. The manuscript has substantially improved after making the suggested amendments.

In the following section, find a detailed point-by-point response in red to the reviewers and the editor’s concerns. Changes made in the manuscript are marked using track changes. The revision has been developed in consultation with all co-authors, and each author has given approval to the final draft.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Mbaye Faye

On behalf of the authors,

Saint-Louis, Senegal

Reponses to Editor’s comments

Comment 1: Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

Answer 1: We have updated and re-structured the text as required. The manuscript has been edited according to the above style guidelines to fit PLOS ONE's style requirements.

Comment 2: Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

"This research was funded by ACASIS project (http://www.agence-nationalerecherche.fr/Projet-ANR-13-SENV-0007). Authors also thank Serge Janicot and Richard Lalou for useful discussions about climate health impacts and their support through ACASIS project."

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

"The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Answer 2: We have removed “This research was funded by ACASIS project (http://www.agence-nationalerecherche.fr/Projet-ANR-13-SENV-0007). Authors also thank Serge Janicot and Richard Lalou for useful discussions about climate health impacts and their support through ACASIS project” as suggested.

Comment 3: Please ensure that you refer to Figure 1 in your text as, if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the figure.

Answer 3: Thank you for noting this. This is done in the study area subsection (L115).

Comment 4: We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

4.1. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

4.2. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

Answer 4: Thank you for your suggestion, we replace the previous figure by one that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license.

Reponses to Reviewer #1 comments

I have read this manuscript with great interest. The study tries to select the most suitable heat wave definition for Bandafassi, Senegal. I think this paper will please the readers of PLOS one. It used very simple methodologies. However, the discussion should be improved. It is more like a literature review. My recommendation is minor revision. Below are my comments.

We appreciate the reviewer’s comments. As the reviewer suggested, we have revised the discussion section in the update manuscript. We will improve our manuscript as the reviewer’s commented. For more detail, please refer to the responses below.

Comment 1: L17: please, replace “the best” by “the most suitable” and add “for Bandafassi” at the end of the objective. L26: What is CI? The reader don’t know yet its meaning yet.

Answer 1: As recommended by the reviewer, we have changed the word in the sentence from ‘‘best’’ by ‘‘most suitable’’ (L14) and we have added “for Bandafassi” (L16) at the end of the objective.

Comment 2: L26: What is CI? The reader don’t know yet its meaning yet.

Answer 2: Thank you for pointing this out. The CI means Confidence Interval. We have added it in the abstract section of update manuscript (L25).

Comment 3: L31: What is “with 3-day”? Do you mean with 3-day duration?

Answer 3: Yes, we did mean with 3-day duration. We have now added the word ‘‘duration’’(L30).

Comment 4: L37: remove “current”

Answer 4: We have removed “current” as suggested.

Comment 5: L41:43: please rewrite starting from “three heat waves …. Study periods”. The sentence is misleading. Also in line 43 and 44. I think it should be “A recent study…. summaries that the excess ….. during the three heat …… 2017) showed a 11% ….. increase in risk.”

Answer 5: We accepted the reviewer’s suggestion. We re-wrote the sentence so it starting from “three heat waves …. Study periods” (L43-45). The sentence “A recent study…. increase in risk” has been re-written in the update manuscript (L46-49).

Comment 6: L60: start time and end time.

Answer 6: It is corrected in the revised manuscript (L65).

Comment 7: L119: What do you refer to in this sentence?

Answer 7: We thank the reviewer for raising the issue, we have been expanded the description of the study area also including more information on its climate condition (for example also on the basis of the Köppen climate classification (Cornforth et al., 2019 [45])).

Comment 8: L135:136: move to statistical analysis

Answer 8: We agree with the reviewer’s point of view. We have moved this sentence at the end of statistical analysis subsection (L208-209).

Comment 9: L202: coma is missing “from figure 2, we “

Answer 9: This is corrected (L222).

Comment 10: Figure 2: It is better to re arrange the x-axis to incremental values and add these specific days as vertical lines (using abline in R).

Answer 10: We appreciate this suggestion as it may help to better understand. However, we believe that for methodological consistence it is better to use the dates which major peaks were observed.

Comment 11: L215: Bold is not needed.

Answer 11: As recommended by reviewer, this has been changed in the manuscript (L235).

Comment 12: Page 12: Please, divide into several paragraphs

Answer 12: We have divided the discussion section into several paragraphs in the update manuscript.

Comment 13: L323: Is it the only reason? Is it or due to heat built-up in body?

Answer 13: We thank the reviewer for this observation. It is possible to have others reasons. It may be certainly true. As far as we know, the reason is that, possibly due to their greater physiological adaptation to high temperatures as showed in the manuscript.

Comment 14: L344: correct to “3 days is the most suitable (OR most representative) definition”

Answer 14: As recommended by reviewer, we have changed the word “best” with “most suitable” in the conclusions section (L391).

Reponses to Reviewer #2 comments

We thank the reviewer for careful and thorough reading of this manuscript. The reviewer’s comment help to improve our paper. Please find below point-by-point a detailed reponse to comments as followed.

Comment 1: The heat wave have highest morality rate in cities while this paper only explores the rural heat wave morality. The reason is that heat wave is amplified a lot when considering the cities. I suggest the results from the cities should also be considered.

Answer 1: We appreciate this helpful comment. We agree with this point as showed in the literature review (e.g. Shafiei Shiva et al., 2018 [51]; Basara et al., 2010 [4]; Khan et al., 2019 [33]). The study location was limited to a single rural areas (Bandafassi). We have expanded it in the Data collection subsection. Therefore we will consider this idea of the reviewer as another future possibility.

Comment 2: What was the base year the heat wave was defined?

Answer 2: We thank the reviewer for raising the issue, the period 1973-2012 was the base year the heat wave.

Comment 3: The heat wave is indeed defined by a temperature, but it does not mean that the threshold temperature should be percentage based. The question is why the percentage-based threshold was used, why not a specific temperature?

Answer 3: We complety agree with the reviewer’s point of view that ‘‘the heat wave is indeed defined by a temperature’’. We found that the both daily minimum and maximum temperature is the most representative variable of daily mortality based the Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC) (results not show in the manuscript). As highlighted by Chen et al. (2015) [53] heat waves are defined, in general, by temperature indicator, temperature threshold and heat wave duration. In our work, heat waves are defined by (1) both daily minimum and maximum as temperature indicator, (2) relative threshold (87th, 90th, 92th, 95th, 97th percentiles of temperature) as temperature threshold (3) and duration (≥2, ≥3 and ≥ 4) as heat wave duration.

Comment 4: Why only morality data was used why also use the morbidity data also?

Answer 4: We are grateful for this comment. We don’t study the morbidity because our database do not contain the morbidity data. Only daily mortality data are used in this study; see Materials and Methods section ‘‘Daily mortality count data were obtained from the Bandafassi Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS)’’.

Comment 5: What is the correlation coefficient in figure 2? I think it will give some idea between the temperature and death perhaps?

Answer 5: We thank the reviewer for these questions. The relationship between the temperature and the number death were closely correlated because the value of correlation coefficient (0.80) is closely to 1.

Comment 6: What is the novelty of the study?

Answer 6: We thank the reviewer for raising the issue. As far as we know, it is the first study in Senegal. Poisson generalized additive model (GAM) is used to investigate the effect of heat wave on mortality and distributed lag non-linear model (DLNM) to evaluate the nonlinear association of heat wave definition at different lag days. Heat wave definition using 3 or more consecutive days with both daily minimum and maximum temperature greater than the 90th percentile shows the best model fit. More precisely, our original findings, crucial for climate services, researchers, clinicians, end-users and decision-makers are: we found that females and people aged ≥ 55 years old were at higher risks than males and other different age groups to heat wave related mortality for definition based on 90th temperature percentile with 3-day duration. These results are expected to be useful for decision makers who plan public health measures in Senegal and elsewhere. Climate parameters including temperatures and humidity could be used to forecast heat wave risks over our area study for early warning.

Comment 7: The literature is not complete. Please include the papers on heat wave definition, indices and what heat waves will be in the coming decades:

-Trends in heat wave related indices in Pakistan

-Prediction of heat waves in Pakistan using quantile regression forests

-Spatial distribution of unidirectional trends in temperature and temperature extremes in Pakistan

-Selection of GCMs for the projection of spatial distribution of heat waves in Pakistan

Answer 7: We appreciate the opportunity to include additional references. As suggested by the reviewer, we have included these relevant references in the revised manuscript.

Paper#1:

-Trends in heat wave related indices in Pakistan; we have added it to in introduction section (Page 3, Line 94-95) and References.

[37] Khan N, Shahid S, Ismail T, Ahmed K, Nawaz N, (2018b) Trends in heat wave related indices in Pakistan. Stoch. Env. Res. Risk A. doi.org/10.1007/s00477-018-1605-2.

Paper#2:

-Prediction of heat waves in Pakistan using quantile regression forests; we have added it to in introduction section (Page 2, Line 81-82; Page 3, Line 89 and Line 94-95) and References.

[28] Khan N, Shahid S, Juneng L, Ahmed K, Ismail T et al. (2019) Prediction of heat waves in Pakistan using quantile regression forests. Atmos. Res. 221, 1–11. doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2019.01.024.

Paper#3:

-Spatial distribution of unidirectional trends in temperature and temperature extremes in Pakistan; we have added it to in introduction section (Page 2, Line 45-46), to in Heat wave definition subsection (Page 5, Line 160) and References.

[8] Khan N, Shahid S, bin Ismail T, Wang, X.-J, (2018a). Spatial distribution of unidirectional trends in temperature and temperature extremes in Pakistan. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 1–15. doi.org/10.1007/s00704-018-2520-7.

Paper#4:

-Selection of GCMs for the projection of spatial distribution of heat waves in Pakistan ; we have added it to in introduction section (Page 3, Line 90 and Line 94-95) and References.

[33] Khan N, Shahid S, Ahmad K, Wang X-J, (2019) Selection of GCMs for the projection of spatial distribution of heat waves in Pakistan. Atmospheric Research 233 (2020) 104688. doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2019.104688.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reponse to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Shamsuddin Shahid

25 Jan 2021

PONE-D-20-27586R1

Impact of Different Heat Wave Definition on Daily Mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mbaye,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 11 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Shamsuddin Shahid

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I would like to thank the authors for their work in updating the manuscript "Impact of Different Heat Wave Definition on Daily Mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal" based on the 1st round of revision. I recommend minor revision for the 2nd round of the review.

1) L124-127: "The full name of the institutional ... this study.". I believe this is not a correct place for this statement. It should be moved to Acknowledgments.

2) Figure 2 doesn't look professional. I believe the author should correct the x-axis and make an incremental scale and then highlight the peak days by vertical lines. Also the x-axis label should be moved down and not overlap any other text.

3) I believe the author should consider English proofreading service for this manuscript to improve it.

Thank you

Reviewer #2: The authors have addressed all the comments that I made on their manuscript sufficiently. Therefore, I recommend that the manuscript maybe sonsidered.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Mohamed Salem Nashwan

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Apr 5;16(4):e0249199. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249199.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


25 Feb 2021

February, 2021

Re: Resubmission of “ Impact of Different Heat Wave Definitions on Daily Mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal”, manuscript id: PONE-D-20-27586R1

Dear Editor :

Thank you for the second round of reviewer’s comments and opportunity to revise our manuscript titled “ Impact of Different Heat Wave Definition on Daily Mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal”. We appreciate the careful reviews and constructive suggestions by the reviewers. The manuscript has substantially improved after making the suggested amendments.

In the following section, find a detailed point-by-point response in red to the reviewers. Changes made in the manuscript are marked using track changes. The revision has been developed in consultation with all co-authors, and each author has given approval to the final version of the manuscript.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Mbaye Faye

On behalf of the authors,

Saint-Louis, Senegal

Reponses to Reviewer #1 comments

I would like to thank the authors for their work in updating the manuscript "Impact of Different Heat Wave Definition on Daily Mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal" based on the 1st round of revision. I recommend minor revision for the 2nd round of the review.

We appreciate the reviewer’s comments for the second round of the review. These comments will help us to improve the quality of the manuscript. For more detail, please refer to the responses below.

Comment 1: L124-127: "The full name of the institutional ... this study.". I believe this is not a correct place for this statement. It should be moved to Acknowledgments.

Answer 1: Thank you for noting this. However, during the 1st review process, the editor (Orsolya Voros) recommend that us to insert it into the beginning of the Methods section:

‘‘Please insert your ethics statement:

‘‘The full name of the institutional review board that approved our specific study is Bandafassi Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS). We confirm that the Bandafassi Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS) approved this study.’’

into the beginning of the Methods section of your manuscript file.’’

However, we have reworded this text in the revised version of manuscript:

‘‘The full name of the institutional review board that reviewed our specific study approval is the Bandafassi Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS). We confirm that this was approved.’’

Comment 2: Figure 2 doesn't look professional. I believe the author should correct the x-axis and make an incremental scale and then highlight the peak days by vertical lines. Also the x-axis label should be moved down and not overlap any other text.

Answer 2: We thank the reviewer for raising the issue. As you suggested, we have now corrected the x-axis of Figure 2 in the revised manuscript.

Comment 3: I believe the author should consider English proofreading service for this manuscript to improve it.

Answer 3: We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. An English proofreading service has been made for the revised manuscript as suggested.

Reponses to Reviewer #2 comments

The authors have addressed all the comments that I made on their manuscript sufficiently. Therefore, I recommend that the manuscript maybe sonsidered.

Thank you for the positive feedback. We appreciate this suggestion which help to improve the readability of our manuscript.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reponse to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 2

Shamsuddin Shahid

15 Mar 2021

Impact of Different Heat Wave Definition on Daily Mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal

PONE-D-20-27586R2

Dear Dr. Mbaye,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Shamsuddin Shahid

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Acceptance letter

Shamsuddin Shahid

22 Mar 2021

PONE-D-20-27586R2

Impact of Different Heat Wave Definitions on Daily Mortality in Bandafassi, Senegal

Dear Dr. Faye:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Shamsuddin Shahid

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Dataset

    (CSV)

    S1 Fig. Relative Risk (RR) of mortality on the lag distribution of heat wave stratified by gender, and age based on the definition ≥ 90th percentile of apparent temperature with duration ≥ 3 consecutive days as heat wave.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Fig. Annual cycle of Tmax (maximum temperature) and Tappmax (maximum apparent temperature) in Kedougou (1973–2012).

    (DOCX)

    S3 Fig. Annual cycle of Tmean (mean temperature) and Tapp (mean apparent temperature) in Kedougou (1973–2012).

    (DOCX)

    S4 Fig. Annual cycle of Tmin (minimum temperature) and Tappmin (minimum apparent temperature) in Kedougou (1973–2012).

    (DOCX)

    S1 Table. Displays the comparison (between apparent temperature and ambient temperature) of the sum of AIC values of all gender- and age- specific mortality for different heat wave definitions.

    Ambient temperature is the best predicteur of mortality in our study in term of AIC because the results with ambient temperature produced the lowest AIC value.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Table. Relative Risk (RR) of daily mortality during heat wave based in different duration (≥3, ≥4, ≥5 days) and intensities (87th, 90th, 92th, 95th, 97th percentile of apparent temperature) during the period 1973–2012.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reponse to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reponse to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The authors cannot provide the house location data and other identifying information, which would be against the ethical agreement with participants. However, for risk factor data analyses the data are fully available. All additional data can be made available by contacting the authors Mbaye Faye (faye.mbaye@ugb.edu.sn) and/or Abdou Kâ Diongue (abdou.diongue@ugb.edu.sn).


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES