ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024
Agent based modelling of blood borne viruses: a scoping review.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe models that historically have been used to model infectious disease outbreaks are equation-based and statistical models. However, these models do not capture the impact of individual and social factors that affect the spread of common blood-borne viruses (BBVs) such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and hepatitis B virus (HBV). Agent-based modelling (ABM) is an alternative modelling approach that is gaining popularity in public health and epidemiology. As the field expands, it is important to understand how ABMs have been applied. In this context, we completed a scoping review of research that has been done on the ABM of BBVs.
methodThe inclusion/exclusion criteria were drafted using the idea of Population, Concept, and Context (PCC). The Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis, an extension to scoping review (PRISMA-ScR), was employed in retrieving ABM literature that studied BBVs. Three databases (Scopus, Pubmed, and Embase) were systematically searched for article retrieval. 200 articles were retrieved from all the databases, with 10 duplicates. After removing the duplicates, 190 papers were screened for inclusion. After analysing the remaining articles, 70 were excluded during the abstract screening phase, and 32 were excluded during the full-text decision. Eighty-eight were retained for the scoping review analysis. To analyse this corpus of 88 papers, we developed a five-level taxonomy that categorised each paper based first on disease type, then transmission mechanism, then modelled population, then geographic location and finally, model outcome.
resultsThe result of this analysis show significant gaps in the ABM of BBV literature, particularly in the modeling of social and individual factors influencing BBV transmission.
conclusionThere is a need for more comprehensive models that address various outcomes across different populations, transmission and intervention mechanisms. Although ABMs are a valuable tool for studying BBVs, further research is needed to address existing gaps and improve our understanding of individual and social factors that influence the spread and control of BBVs. This research can inform researchers, modellers, epidemiologists, and public health practitioners of the ABM research areas that need to be explored to reduce the burden of BBVs globally.
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.