Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28351976›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2017

Comparing nonpharmaceutical interventions for containing emerging epidemics.

Corey M Peak, Lauren M Childs, Yonatan H Grad, Caroline O Buckee

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 124 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
124citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
21.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

124 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 293 citations in OpenAlex.

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

64 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Corey M PeakCenter for Communicable Disease Dynamics, Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115.ORCID 0000-0001-6150-5318
Lauren M ChildsCenter for Communicable Disease Dynamics, Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115.
Yonatan H GradDepartment of Immunology and Infectious Diseases, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115.ORCID 0000-0001-5646-1314
Caroline O BuckeeCenter for Communicable Disease Dynamics, Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115; cbuckee@hsph.harvard.edu.
Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics & Policy · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · US

Funding

Understanding and controlling antibiotic resistanceU54GM088558 · NIGMS · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI BUCKEE, CAROLINE O'FLAHERTY · 2009 to 2018
$26.4M
Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases and BiodefenseT32AI007535 · NIAID · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI GRAD, YONATAN H, MURRAY, MEGAN B · 1998 to 2025
$4.8M
Genomic epidemiology of Neisseria gonorrhoeae with elevated MICs to cefiximeK08AI104767 · NIAID · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI GRAD, YONATAN H · 2013 to 2015
$547k
NIAID NIH HHS K08 AI104767NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007535NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM088558
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Strategies for containing an emerging infectious disease outbreak must be nonpharmaceutical when drugs or vaccines for the pathogen do not yet exist or are unavailable. The success of these nonpharmaceutical strategies will depend on not only the effectiveness of isolation measures but also the epidemiological characteristics of the infection. However, there is currently no systematic framework to assess the relationship between different containment strategies and the natural history and epidemiological dynamics of the pathogen. Here, we compare the effectiveness of quarantine and symptom monitoring, implemented via contact tracing, in controlling epidemics using an agent-based branching model. We examine the relationship between epidemic containment and the disease dynamics of symptoms and infectiousness for seven case-study diseases with diverse natural histories, including Ebola, influenza A, and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). We show that the comparative effectiveness of symptom monitoring and quarantine depends critically on the natural history of the infectious disease, its inherent transmissibility, and the intervention feasibility in the particular healthcare setting. The benefit of quarantine over symptom monitoring is generally maximized for fast-course diseases, but we show the conditions under which symptom monitoring alone can control certain outbreaks. This quantitative framework can guide policymakers on how best to use nonpharmaceutical interventions and prioritize research during an outbreak of an emerging pathogen.

Indexed as

Communicable Diseases, EmergingCoronavirus InfectionsDisease OutbreaksHemorrhagic Fever, EbolaHepatitis AHumansInfluenza, HumanModels, TheoreticalQuarantineSevere Acute Respiratory SyndromeSmallpoxactive symptom monitoringcontact tracingepidemiologyinfectious disease dynamicsquarantine

Identifiers

PMID28351976
PMCPMC5393248
OpenAlexW2601351842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.