Abstract
Recent advances in clinical prediction for diarrheal etiology in low- and middle-income countries have revealed that addition of weather data improves predictive performance. However, the optimal source of weather data remains unclear. We aim to compare model estimated satellite- and ground-based observational data with weather station directly-observed data for diarrheal prediction. We used clinical and etiological data from a large multi-center study of children with diarrhea to compare these methods. We show that the two sources of weather conditions perform similarly in most locations. We conclude that while model estimated data is a viable, scalable tool for public health interventions and disease prediction, directly observed weather station data approximates the modeled data, and given its ease of access, is likely adequate for prediction of diarrheal etiology in children in low- and middle-income countries.