ArticlePloS one2022
Ranking influential nodes in complex networks with community structure.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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.
- Exploring Priority Intrapartum Services Associated with Childbirth Experience During Vaginal Birth: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Identifying Network Propagation Sources Using Advanced Centrality Measures.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Use of Ecological Networks to Reveal Interspecific Fungal Interactions from 150 Years of Foray Records.Mycobiology · 2025Article
- Network analysis of postpartum depression symptoms and perinatal risk factors in Chinese women: a prospective observational study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Detailed-level modelling of influence spreading on complex networks.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Exploring influential nodes using global and local information.Scientific reports · 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
Quantifying a node's importance is decisive for developing efficient strategies to curb or accelerate any spreading phenomena. Centrality measures are well-known methods used to quantify the influence of nodes by extracting information from the network's structure. The pitfall of these measures is to pinpoint nodes located in the vicinity of each other, saturating their shared zone of influence. In this paper, we propose a ranking strategy exploiting the ubiquity of the community structure in real-world networks. The proposed community-aware ranking strategy naturally selects a set of distant spreaders with the most significant influence in the networks. One can use it with any centrality measure. We investigate its effectiveness using real-world and synthetic networks with controlled parameters in a Susceptible-Infected-Recovered (SIR) diffusion model scenario. Experimental results indicate the superiority of the proposed ranking strategy over all its counterparts agnostic about the community structure. Additionally, results show that it performs better in networks with a strong community structure and a high number of communities of heterogeneous sizes.
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.