Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27079788›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2016

Epidemic risk from friendship network data: an equivalence with a non-uniform sampling of contact networks.

Julie Fournet, Alain Barrat

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Digital contact tracing technologies in epidemics: a rapid review.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Julie FournetAix Marseille Université, Université de Toulon, CNRS, CPT, UMR 7332, 13288, Marseille, France.
Alain BarratAix Marseille Université, Université de Toulon, CNRS, CPT, UMR 7332, 13288, Marseille, France.
Aix-Marseille Université · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contacts between individuals play an important role in determining how infectious diseases spread. Various methods to gather data on such contacts co-exist, from surveys to wearable sensors. Comparisons of data obtained by different methods in the same context are however scarce, in particular with respect to their use in data-driven models of spreading processes. Here, we use a combined data set describing contacts registered by sensors and friendship relations in the same population to address this issue in a case study. We investigate if the use of the friendship network is equivalent to a sampling procedure performed on the sensor contact network with respect to the outcome of simulations of spreading processes: such an equivalence might indeed give hints on ways to compensate for the incompleteness of contact data deduced from surveys. We show that this is indeed the case for these data, for a specifically designed sampling procedure, in which respondents report their neighbors with a probability depending on their contact time. We study the impact of this specific sampling procedure on several data sets, discuss limitations of our approach and its possible applications in the use of data sets of various origins in data-driven simulations of epidemic processes.

Indexed as

Contact TracingDisease Transmission, InfectiousInterpersonal RelationsHumans

Identifiers

PMID27079788
PMCPMC4832327
OpenAlexW2337049494

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.