Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34268514›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2021

Mitigating outbreaks in congregate settings by decreasing the size of the susceptible population.

Seth Blumberg, Phoebe Lu, Christopher M Hoover, James O Lloyd-Smith, Ada T Kwan, David Sears, Stefano M Bertozzi, Lee Worden

Open access · greenAbstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2021. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Seth BlumbergUniversity of California San Francisco, Francis I. Proctor Foundation, San Francisco, California, USA.
Phoebe LuUniversity of California San Francisco, Francis I. Proctor Foundation, San Francisco, California, USA.
Christopher M HooverUniversity of California San Francisco, Francis I. Proctor Foundation, San Francisco, California, USA.
James O Lloyd-SmithUniversity of California Los Angeles, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Ada T KwanUniversity of California San Francisco, Department of Medicine, San Francisco, California, USA.
David SearsUniversity of California San Francisco, Department of Medicine, San Francisco, California, USA.
Stefano M BertozziUniversity of California, Berkeley, California, USA.
Lee WordenUniversity of California San Francisco, Francis I. Proctor Foundation, San Francisco, California, USA.
University of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Ebola modeling: behavior, asymptomatic infection, and contacts (2019-nCoV Admin Supplement)R01GM130900 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI PORCO, TRAVIS CHRISTIAN · 2019 to 2022
$1.6M
ACL HHS U01CK000590NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM130900
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While many transmission models have been developed for community spread of respiratory pathogens, less attention has been given to modeling the interdependence of disease introduction and spread seen in congregate settings, such as prisons or nursing homes. As demonstrated by the explosive outbreaks of COVID-19 seen in congregate settings, the need for effective outbreak prevention and mitigation strategies for these settings is critical. Here we consider how interventions that decrease the size of the susceptible populations, such as vaccination or depopulation, impact the expected number of infections due to outbreaks. Introduction of disease into the resident population from the community is modeled as a branching process, while spread between residents is modeled via a compartmental model. Control is modeled as a proportional decrease in both the number of susceptible residents and the reproduction number. We find that vaccination or depopulation can have a greater than linear effect on anticipated infections. For example, assuming a reproduction number of 3.0 for density-dependent COVID-19 transmission, we find that reducing the size of the susceptible population by 20% reduced overall disease burden by 47%. We highlight the California state prison system as an example for how these findings provide a quantitative framework for implementing infection control in congregate settings. Additional applications of our modeling framework include optimizing the distribution of residents into independent residential units, and comparison of preemptive versus reactive vaccination strategies.

Identifiers

PMID34268514
PMCPMC8282103
OpenAlexW3181766182

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.