ArticlePLoS computational biology2022
Estimates of the basic reproduction number for rubella using seroprevalence data and indicator-based approaches.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Generation time in a discrete epidemic model with asymptomatic carriers: beyond geometric waiting times.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2027Article
- Individual and population level uncertainty interact to determine the performance of outbreak surveillance systems.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional study of seroprevalence in Armenia, 2025: measles, mumps, rubella, and diphtheria.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Estimating the basic reproduction number of measles in low-and middle-income settings using 172 seroprevalence studies: A modelling approach.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Collective Immunity to the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Viruses in the Kyrgyz Population.Vaccines · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Congenital Rubella Syndrome Does Not Increase with Introduction of Rubella-Containing Vaccine.Vaccines · 2024Article
- Article
- Mitigating Vaccine Hesitancy and Building Trust to Prevent Future Measles Outbreaks in England.Vaccines · 2023Article
- Estimated incidence and transmission intensity of rubella infection in Zambia pre-vaccine era 2005-2016.Epidemiology and infection · 2022Article
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 basic reproduction number (R0) of an infection determines the impact of its control. For many endemic infections, R0 is often estimated from appropriate country-specific seroprevalence data. Studies sometimes pool estimates from the same region for settings lacking seroprevalence data, but the reliability of this approach is unclear. Plausibly, indicator-based approaches could predict R0 for such settings. We calculated R0 for rubella for 98 settings and correlated its value against 66 demographic, economic, education, housing and health-related indicators. We also trained a random forest regression algorithm using these indicators as the input and R0 as the output. We used the mean-square error to compare the performances of the random forest, simple linear regression and a regional averaging method in predicting R0 using 4-fold cross validation. R0 was <5, 5-10 and >10 for 81, 14 and 3 settings respectively, with no apparent regional differences and in the limited available data, it was usually lower for rural than urban areas. R0 was most correlated with educational attainment, and household indicators for the Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients respectively and with poverty-related indicators followed by the crude death rate considering the Maximum Information Coefficient, although the correlation for each was relatively weak (Pearson correlation coefficient: 0.4, 95%CI: (0.24,0.48) for educational attainment). A random forest did not perform better in predicting R0 than simple linear regression, depending on the subsets of training indicators and studies, and neither out-performed a regional averaging approach. R0 for rubella is typically low and using indicators to estimate its value is not straightforward. A regional averaging approach may provide as reliable an estimate of R0 for settings lacking seroprevalence data as one based on indicators. The findings may be relevant for other infections and studies estimating the disease burden and the impact of interventions for settings lacking seroprevalence data.
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.