Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38271322›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Omicron vs. the rest: Assessing the competitive dynamics and coinfection scenarios of COVID-19 strains on a social network.

Hamed Jabraeilian, Yousef Jamali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Hamed JabraeilianBiomathematics Laboratory, Department of Applied Mathematics, School of Mathematical Science, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
Yousef JamaliBiomathematics Laboratory, Department of Applied Mathematics, School of Mathematical Science, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-5709-3821

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid spread and evolving nature of COVID-19 variants have raised concerns regarding their competitive dynamics and coinfection scenarios. In this study, we assess the competitive interactions between the Omicron variant and other prominent variants (Alpha, Beta and Delta) on a social network, considering both single infection and coinfection states. Using the SIRS model, we simulate the progression of these variants and analyze their impact on infection rates, mortality and overall disease burden. Our findings demonstrate that the Alpha and Beta strains exhibit comparable contagion levels, with the Alpha strain displaying higher infection and mortality rates. Moreover, the Delta strain emerges as the most prevalent and virulent strain, surpassing the other variants. When introduced alongside the less virulent Omicron strain, the Delta strain results in higher infection and mortality rates. However, the Omicron strain's dominance leads to an overall increase in disease statistics. Remarkably, our study highlights the efficacy of the Omicron variant in supplanting more virulent strains and its potential role in mitigating the spread of infectious diseases. The Omicron strain demonstrates a competitive advantage over the other variants, suggesting its potential to reduce the severity of the disease and alleviate the burden on healthcare systems. These findings underscore the importance of monitoring and understanding the dynamics of COVID-19 variants, as they can inform effective prevention and mitigation strategies, particularly with the emergence of variants that possess a relative advantage in controlling disease transmission.

Indexed as

CoinfectionCOVID-19HumansSARS-CoV-2Social Networking

Identifiers

PMID38271322
PMCPMC10810514

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.