ArticleMathematical biosciences2020
When is SARS-CoV-2 in your shopping list?
Article in Mathematical biosciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Confinement tonicity on epidemic spreading.Journal of mathematical biology · 2024Article
- Computational decision-support tools for urban design to improve resilience against COVID-19 and other infectious diseases: A systematic review.Progress in planning · 2023Article
- Using simulation modelling and systems science to help contain COVID-19: A systematic review.Systems research and behavioral science · 2022Article
- Network models to evaluate vaccine strategies towards herd immunity in COVID-19.Journal of theoretical biology · 2021Article
- Barriers to Accessing Healthy Food and Food Assistance During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Racial Justice Uprisings: A Mixed-Methods Investigation of Emerging Adults' Experiences.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2021Article
- Controlling of pandemic COVID-19 using optimal control theory.Results in physics · 2021Article
- In-host Mathematical Modelling of COVID-19 in Humans.Annual reviews in control · 2020Article
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
The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused several million confirmed cases worldwide. The necessity of keeping open and accessible public commercial establishments such as supermarkets or pharmacies increases during the pandemic provided that distancing rules and crowd control are satisfied. Herein, using agent-based models, we explore the potential spread of the novel SARS-CoV-2 considering the case of a small size supermarket. For diverse distancing rules and number of simultaneous users (customers), we question flexible and limited movement policies, guiding the flow and interactions of users in place. Results indicate that a guided, limited in movement and well-organized policy combined with a distance rule of at least 1 m and a small number of users may aid in the mitigation of potential new contagions in more than 90% compared to the usual policy of flexible movement with more users which may reach up to 64% of mitigation of potential new infections under the same distancing conditions. This study may guide novel strategies for the mitigation of the current COVID-19 pandemic, at any stage, and prevention of future outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 or related viruses.
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.