The potential of resilience indicators to signal the risk of disease outbreaks, a systematic review and guide

To reduce the consequences of infectious disease outbreaks, the timely implementation of public health measures is crucial. Currently used early-warning systems are highly context-dependent and require a long phase of model building. A proposed solution to anticipate the onset or termination of an outbreak is the use of so-called resilience indicators. These indicators are based on the generic theory of critical slowing down and require only incidence time series. Here we assess the potential for this approach to contribute to outbreak anticipation. We systematically reviewed studies that used resilience indicators to predict outbreaks or terminations of epidemics. We identified 37 studies meeting the inclusion criteria: 21 using simulated data and 16 real-world data. 36 out of 37 studies detected significant signs of critical slowing down before a critical transition (i.e., the onset or end of an outbreak), with a sensitivity (i.e., the proportion of true positive outbreak warnings) ranging from 0.67 to 1 and a lead time ranging from 10 days to 68 months. Challenges include low resolution and limited length of time series, a too rapid increase in cases, and strong seasonal patterns which may hamper the sensitivity of resilience indicators. Alternative types of data, such as Google searches or social media data, have the potential to improve predictions in some cases. Resilience indicators may be useful when the risk of disease outbreaks is changing gradually. This may happen, for instance, when pathogens become increasingly adapted to an environment or evolve gradually to escape immunity. High-resolution monitoring is needed to reach sufficient sensitivity. If those conditions are met, resilience indicators could help improve the current practice of prediction, facilitating timely outbreak response. We provide a step-by-step guide on the use of resilience indicators in infectious disease epidemiology, and guidance on the relevant situations to use this approach. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Funding Statement This work is part of the research programme One Health PACT with project number 109986, which is (partly) financed by the Dutch Research Council (NWO). ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable. Yes All relevant data are within the main text and tables and its Supporting information files.