Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20538755›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2011

Insights from unifying modern approximations to infections on networks.

Thomas House, Matt J Keeling

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Trust based attachment.PloS one · 2023
    Article
  5. Fitting the reproduction number from UK coronavirus case data and why it is close to 1.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Contact tracing - Old models and new challenges.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. One model to rule them all? Modelling approaches across OneHealth for human, animal and plant epidemics.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019
    Review
  16. Article
  17. SIR dynamics in random networks with communities.Journal of mathematical biology · 2018
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Thomas HouseDepartment of Biological Sciences, Mathematics Institute, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, Coventry, UK. t.a.house@warwick.ac.uk
Matt J Keeling

Funding

Medical Research Council G0701256
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Networks are increasingly central to modern science owing to their ability to conceptualize multiple interacting components of a complex system. As a specific example of this, understanding the implications of contact network structure for the transmission of infectious diseases remains a key issue in epidemiology. Three broad approaches to this problem exist: explicit simulation; derivation of exact results for special networks; and dynamical approximations. This paper focuses on the last of these approaches, and makes two main contributions. Firstly, formal mathematical links are demonstrated between several prima facie unrelated dynamical approximations. And secondly, these links are used to derive two novel dynamical models for network epidemiology, which are compared against explicit stochastic simulation. The success of these new models provides improved understanding about the interaction of network structure and transmission dynamics.

Indexed as

Disease Transmission, InfectiousModels, BiologicalComputer SimulationDisease Outbreaks

Identifiers

PMID20538755
PMCPMC3024819

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.