Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28729607›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Effective Methods of Restraining Diffusion in Terms of Epidemic Dynamics.

Fei Xiong, Zhao-Yi Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Fei XiongSchool of Electronic and Information Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, 100044, China. xiongf@bjtu.edu.cn.
Zhao-Yi LiSchool of Electronic and Information Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, 100044, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Models, TheoreticalAlgorithmsComputer SimulationEpidemicsInformation Dissemination

Identifiers

PMID28729607
PMCPMC5519704

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.