ArticlePLoS computational biology2021
Deriving fine-scale models of human mobility from aggregated origin-destination flow data.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding human mobility patterns under a public health emergency.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2026Article
- Enhancing the gravity model for commuters: Time-and-spatial-structure-based improvements in Japan's metropolitan areas.PloS one · 2025Article
- The role of migration networks in the development of Botswana's generalized HIV epidemic.eLife · 2023Article
- A vision for incorporating human mobility in the study of human-wildlife interactions.Nature ecology & evolution · 2023Review
- Inferring origin-destination distribution of agent transfer in a complex network using deep gated recurrent units.Scientific reports · 2023Article
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
Abstract
The spatial dynamics of epidemics are fundamentally affected by patterns of human mobility. Mobile phone call detail records (CDRs) are a rich source of mobility data, and allow semi-mechanistic models of movement to be parameterised even for resource-poor settings. While the gravity model typically reproduces human movement reasonably well at the administrative level spatial scale, past studies suggest that parameter estimates vary with the level of spatial discretisation at which models are fitted. Given that privacy concerns usually preclude public release of very fine-scale movement data, such variation would be problematic for individual-based simulations of epidemic spread parametrised at a fine spatial scale. We therefore present new methods to fit fine-scale mathematical mobility models (here we implement variants of the gravity and radiation models) to spatially aggregated movement data and investigate how model parameter estimates vary with spatial resolution. We use gridded population data at 1km resolution to derive population counts at different spatial scales (down to ∼ 5km grids) and implement mobility models at each scale. Parameters are estimated from administrative-level flow data between overnight locations in Kenya and Namibia derived from CDRs: where the model spatial resolution exceeds that of the mobility data, we compare the flow data between a particular origin and destination with the sum of all model flows between cells that lie within those particular origin and destination administrative units. Clear evidence of over-dispersion supports the use of negative binomial instead of Poisson likelihood for count data with high values. Radiation models use fewer parameters than the gravity model and better predict trips between overnight locations for both considered countries. Results show that estimates for some parameters change between countries and with spatial resolution and highlight how imperfect flow data and spatial population distribution can influence model fit.
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.