Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32697781›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2020

Beyond ranking nodes: Predicting epidemic outbreak sizes by network centralities.

Doina Bucur, Petter Holme

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Distribution of centrality measures on undirected random networks via the cavity method.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Characteristics of the 100 largest modern zoonotic disease outbreaks.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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.

Doina BucurUniversity of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4830-7162
Petter HolmeTokyo Tech World Research Hub Initiative (WRHI), Institute of Innovative Research, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Yokohama, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2156-1096

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying important nodes for disease spreading is a central topic in network epidemiology. We investigate how well the position of a node, characterized by standard network measures, can predict its epidemiological importance in any graph of a given number of nodes. This is in contrast to other studies that deal with the easier prediction problem of ranking nodes by their epidemic importance in given graphs. As a benchmark for epidemic importance, we calculate the exact expected outbreak size given a node as the source. We study exhaustively all graphs of a given size, so do not restrict ourselves to certain generative models for graphs, nor to graph data sets. Due to the large number of possible nonisomorphic graphs of a fixed size, we are limited to ten-node graphs. We find that combinations of two or more centralities are predictive (R2 scores of 0.91 or higher) even for the most difficult parameter values of the epidemic simulation. Typically, these successful combinations include one normalized spectral centrality (such as PageRank or Katz centrality) and one measure that is sensitive to the number of edges in the graph.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyEpidemicsAlgorithmsComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansInfectious Disease MedicineInfluenza, HumanMachine LearningModels, Statistical

Identifiers

PMID32697781
PMCPMC7398553

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.