Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26161740›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

The Effectiveness of Age-Specific Isolation Policies on Epidemics of Influenza A (H1N1) in a Large City in Central South China.

Ruchun Liu, Ross Ka-kit Leung, Tianmu Chen, Xixing Zhang, Faming Chen, Shuilian Chen, Jin Zhao

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Comparison of methods to Estimate Basic Reproduction Number (Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ruchun LiuOffice for Disease Control and Emergency Response, Changsha Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Changsha, The People's Republic of China.
Ross Ka-kit LeungOffice for Disease Control and Emergency Response, Changsha Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Changsha, The People's Republic of China; Stanley Ho Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR, The People's Republic of China.
Tianmu ChenOffice for Disease Control and Emergency Response, Changsha Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Changsha, The People's Republic of China.
Xixing ZhangOffice for Disease Control and Emergency Response, Changsha Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Changsha, The People's Republic of China.
Faming ChenOffice for Disease Control and Emergency Response, Changsha Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Changsha, The People's Republic of China.
Shuilian ChenOffice for Disease Control and Emergency Response, Changsha Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Changsha, The People's Republic of China.
Jin ZhaoOffice for Disease Control and Emergency Response, Changsha Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Changsha, The People's Republic of China.
Hunan Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention · CNChinese University of Hong Kong · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the early stage of a pandemic, isolation is the most effective means of controlling transmission. However, the effectiveness of age-specific isolation policies is not clear; especially little information is available concerning their effectiveness in China. Epidemiological and serological survey data in the city of Changsha were employed to estimate key model parameters. The average infectious period (date of recovery-date of symptom onset) of influenza A (H1N1) was 5.2 days. Of all infected persons, 45.93% were asymptomatic. The basic reproduction number of the influenza A (H1N1) pandemic was 1.82. Based on the natural history of influenza A (H1N1), we built an extended susceptible-exposed-infectious/asymptomatic-removed model, taking age groups: 0-5, 6-14, 15-24, 25-59, and ≥60 years into consideration for isolation. Without interventions, the total attack rates (TARs) in each age group were 42.73%, 41.95%, 20.51%, 45.03%, and 37.49%, respectively. Although the isolation of 25-59 years-old persons was the most effective, the TAR of individuals of aged 0-5 and 6-14 could not be reduced. Paradoxically, isolating individuals ≥60 year olds was not predicted to be an effective way of reducing the TAR in this group but isolating the age-group 25-59 did, which implies inter-age-group transmission from the latter to the former is significant. Isolating multiple age groups increased effectiveness. The most effective combined isolation target groups were of 6-14 + 25-59 year olds, 6-14 + 15-24 + 25-59 year olds, and 0-5 + 6-14 + 25-59 + ≥60 year olds. The last of these isolation schemas reduced the TAR of the total population from 39.64% to 0.006%, which was exceptionally close to the effectiveness of isolating all five age groups (TAR = 0.004%).

Indexed as

Patient IsolationAdolescentAdultAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolChinaCitiesComputer SimulationHumansInfantInfant, NewbornInfluenza A Virus, H1N1 SubtypeInfluenza, HumanMiddle AgedPopulation Density

Identifiers

PMID26161740
PMCPMC4498797
OpenAlexW1544744398

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.