ArticlePLoS computational biology2023
Estimating fine age structure and time trends in human contact patterns from coarse contact data: The Bayesian rate consistency model.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comparison of contact patterns derived from the population structure in agent-based models and empirical contact survey data.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Addressing survey fatigue bias in longitudinal social contact studies to improve pandemic preparedness.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessing the role of children in the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium using perturbation analysis.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Bayesian mixture models for phylogenetic source attribution from consensus sequences and time since infection estimates.Statistical methods in medical research · 2025Article
- Review
- Longitudinal population-level HIV epidemiologic and genomic surveillance highlights growing gender disparity of HIV transmission in Uganda.Nature microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Since the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), large-scale social contact surveys are now longitudinally measuring the fundamental changes in human interactions in the face of the pandemic and non-pharmaceutical interventions. Here, we present a model-based Bayesian approach that can reconstruct contact patterns at 1-year resolution even when the age of the contacts is reported coarsely by 5 or 10-year age bands. This innovation is rooted in population-level consistency constraints in how contacts between groups must add up, which prompts us to call the approach presented here the Bayesian rate consistency model. The model can also quantify time trends and adjust for reporting fatigue emerging in longitudinal surveys through the use of computationally efficient Hilbert Space Gaussian process priors. We illustrate estimation accuracy on simulated data as well as social contact data from Europe and Africa for which the exact age of contacts is reported, and then apply the model to social contact data with coarse information on the age of contacts that were collected in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic from April to June 2020 across five longitudinal survey waves. We estimate the fine age structure in social contacts during the early stages of the pandemic and demonstrate that social contact intensities rebounded in an age-structured, non-homogeneous manner. The Bayesian rate consistency model provides a model-based, non-parametric, computationally tractable approach for estimating the fine structure and longitudinal trends in social contacts and is applicable to contemporary survey data with coarsely reported age of contacts as long as the exact age of survey participants is reported.
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.