Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26176549›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

The French Connection: The First Large Population-Based Contact Survey in France Relevant for the Spread of Infectious Diseases.

Guillaume Béraud, Sabine Kazmercziak, Philippe Beutels, Daniel Levy-Bruhl, Xavier Lenne, Nathalie Mielcarek, Yazdan Yazdanpanah, Pierre-Yves Boëlle, Niel Hens, Benoit Dervaux

Abstract 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 113 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
113citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

113 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

53 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

10 authors.

Guillaume BéraudMédecine Interne et Maladies Infectieuses, Centre Hospitalier de Poitiers, Poitiers, France; EA2694, Université Droit et Santé Lille 2, Lille, France; Interuniversity Institute for Biostatistics and statistical Bioinformatics, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.
Sabine KazmercziakCRESGE, Université Catholique de Lille, Lille, France.
Philippe BeutelsCentre for Health Economics Research & Modeling Infectious Diseases (CHERMID), Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium.
Daniel Levy-BruhlDépartement des maladies infectieuses, InVS, Saint-Maurice, France.
Xavier LenneDépartement d'information médicale, Université de Lille Nord de France, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille, Lille, France.
Nathalie MielcarekCenter for Infection and Immunity of Lille, Institut Pasteur de Lille, Lille, France; INSERM U1019, Lille, France; CNRS UMR8204, Lille, France; Université Lille-Nord de France, Lille, France.
Yazdan YazdanpanahService des Maladies Infectieuses et tropicales, Hôpital Bichat Claude Bernard, Paris, France.
Pierre-Yves BoëlleUMR-S 707, INSERM, Paris, France.
Niel HensInteruniversity Institute for Biostatistics and statistical Bioinformatics, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium; Centre for Health Economics Research & Modeling Infectious Diseases (CHERMID), Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium.
Benoit DervauxEA2694, Université Droit et Santé Lille 2, Lille, France; DRCI, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille, Lille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEmpirical social contact patterns are essential to understand the spread of infectious diseases. To date, no such data existed for France. Although infectious diseases are frequently seasonal, the temporal variation of contact patterns has not been documented hitherto.

methodsCOMES-F is the first French large-scale population survey, carried out over 3 different periods (February-March, April, April-May) with some participants common to the first and the last period. Participants described their contacts for 2 consecutive days, and reported separately on professional contacts when typically over 20 per day.

results2033 participants reported 38 881 contacts (weighted median [first quartile-third quartile]: 8[5-14] per day), and 54 378 contacts with supplementary professional contacts (9[5-17]). Contrary to age, gender, household size, holidays, weekend and occupation, period of the year had little influence on the number of contacts or the mixing patterns. Contact patterns were highly assortative with age, irrespective of the location of the contact, and gender, with women having 8% more contacts than men. Although most contacts occurred at home and at school, the inclusion of professional contacts modified the structure of the mixing patterns. Holidays and weekends reduced dramatically the number of contacts, and as proxies for school closure, reduced R0 by 33% and 28%, respectively. Thus, school closures could have an important impact on the spread of close contact infections in France.

conclusionsDespite no clear evidence for temporal variation, trends suggest that more studies are needed. Age and gender were found important determinants of the mixing patterns. Gender differences in mixing patterns might help explain gender differences in the epidemiology of infectious diseases.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolCommunicable DiseasesFemaleFranceHolidaysHumansInfantMaleMiddle AgedSchoolsSeasonsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID26176549
PMCPMC4503306

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.