INFLUENCE OF CLIMATIC VARIATIONS IN THE OCCURRENCE OF DISEASES OF THE UPPER AIRWAYS IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF MONTEIRO – PB
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X16702Keywords:
Precipitação pluvial, temperatura e umidade do ar, correlaçãoAbstract
The present study evaluated the effects of climatic variables (precipitation, mean air temperature and relative humidity) on the incidence of upper respiratory tract illnesses in the municipality of Monteiro – PB. The datasets of occurrence of hospitalizations for diseases of the upper respiratory tract (HDURT) in the municipality of Monteiro PB was obtained from the Department of the SUS - DATASUS, whose information can be found on the Ministry of Health website, for the period 2008 to 2012. The climate da ta (rainfall, average air temperature and relative humidity), also corresponding to the period from 2008 to 2012, were collected from the National Institute of Meteorology (INMET) site, coming from automatic meteorological stations. The linear Spearman correlation was used to assess the degree of correlation between climate variables and the number of HDURT. The results showed that: a) the maximum values of the number of records HDURT occur during the autumn-winter (March to August) and minimum during the spring-summer (September to February), being lower in the year 2012 (drier year with rainfall below average) when compared to that summer of 2006 and 2008 (years with wetter summers). The climate variables showed a rainy season that extends from March to May, with rainfall less uniform variable and very weak correlation with the records of HDURT (R² = 0.119), with a peak in May. The monthly average air temperature showed low variability, being higher in the summer (December to March) and lower in the winter (June-August), with a minimum in July. The relative humidity was always lower in period of spring and early summer (September to December) and higher in the winter period (from June to August); c) The average number of monthly records of URTI was inversely correlated with air temperature (R² = 0.512) and showed a strong increasing / positive correlation with relative humidity (R² = 0.912).Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
