ArticleScientific reports2017
Effective Methods of Restraining Diffusion in Terms of Epidemic Dynamics.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Topic selectivity and adaptivity promote spreading of short messages.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Risk evaluation at municipality level of a COVID-19 outbreak incorporating relevant geographic data: the study case of Galicia.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Incorporating social opinion in the evolution of an epidemic spread.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Removing influential nodes or shortcuts in a network restrains epidemic or information diffusion, but this method destroys the connectivity of the network and changes the topological structure. As an alternative, an additional field can be imposed in the network to affect node behaviors and slow down diffusion dynamics. However, little research has been performed systematically to analyze and compare these methods. This paper investigates epidemic dynamics and proposes the following four methods to restrain the diffusion process: blocking nodes, blocking edges, distracting node attention, and propagating opposite information. We compare differences in the actions of these methods, and investigate their joint effects. Through numerical experiments in a scale-free network and a real network, we observe that these methods change the spreading threshold and final extent with different conditions. The method of blocking nodes is more efficient and economical than blocking edges. Propagating opposite information can effectively prevent diffusion of target information that has a large spreading rate, whereas distracting node attention only takes effect for the information with a small rate. Meanwhile, the effects of these two methods mainly depend on their action time. From the joint effects, we can select the optimal method for different situations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.