Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34310590›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2021

Projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: An update and comparison with empirical data for the COVID-19 era.

Kiesha Prem, Kevin van Zandvoort, Petra Klepac, Rosalind M Eggo, Nicholas G Davies, Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases COVID-19 Working Group, Alex R Cook, Mark Jit

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 144 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
144citing 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

144 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. VIBES: A multiscale modeling approach integrating within-host and between-hosts dynamics in epidemics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  8. A global analysis of patterns of tuberculosis exposure and transmission.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

84 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Kiesha PremCentre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0528-798X
Kevin van ZandvoortCentre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Petra KlepacCentre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4132-3933
Rosalind M EggoCentre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0362-6717
Nicholas G DaviesCentre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases COVID-19 Working Group
Alex R CookSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-6271-5832
Mark JitCentre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6658-8255

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 206250/Z/17/ZWellcome Trust 206471/Z/17/ZWellcome Trust 208812/Z/17/ZWellcome Trust 210758/Z/18/ZWellcome Trust 221303/Z/20/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mathematical models have played a key role in understanding the spread of directly-transmissible infectious diseases such as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), as well as the effectiveness of public health responses. As the risk of contracting directly-transmitted infections depends on who interacts with whom, mathematical models often use contact matrices to characterise the spread of infectious pathogens. These contact matrices are usually generated from diary-based contact surveys. However, the majority of places in the world do not have representative empirical contact studies, so synthetic contact matrices have been constructed using more widely available setting-specific survey data on household, school, classroom, and workplace composition combined with empirical data on contact patterns in Europe. In 2017, the largest set of synthetic contact matrices to date were published for 152 geographical locations. In this study, we update these matrices with the most recent data and extend our analysis to 177 geographical locations. Due to the observed geographic differences within countries, we also quantify contact patterns in rural and urban settings where data is available. Further, we compare both the 2017 and 2020 synthetic matrices to out-of-sample empirically-constructed contact matrices, and explore the effects of using both the empirical and synthetic contact matrices when modelling physical distancing interventions for the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that the synthetic contact matrices show qualitative similarities to the contact patterns in the empirically-constructed contact matrices. Models parameterised with the empirical and synthetic matrices generated similar findings with few differences observed in age groups where the empirical matrices have missing or aggregated age groups. This finding means that synthetic contact matrices may be used in modelling outbreaks in settings for which empirical studies have yet to be conducted.

Indexed as

Age DistributionCOVID-19Empirical ResearchEuropeGeographyHumansPandemicsRural PopulationSARS-CoV-2Urban Population

Identifiers

PMID34310590
PMCPMC8354454

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.