ArticlePloS one2025
Comparative SIR/SEIR modeling of the Antonine Plague in Rome.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Some scholars consider the Antonine Plague to have been a major disease outbreak in the 2nd century CE that caused a significant decline in the population of the Roman Empire. Although there is currently no molecular evidence of the specific pathogen, literary evidence indicates the parameters of the disease that it caused and how significant the impact on Roman society was. One way to advance the current discussion concerning the Antonine Plague's impact on the Roman Empire's population is to examine the currently available sources and comparatively model the spread of different pathogens in a specific location with known demographic data for the relevant period. To accomplish this, we developed a series of dynamic ordinary differential equation models of the spread of disease in Rome between 165 and 189 CE for several pathogens. We found that daily disease deaths in the final years of the pandemic were inconsistent with estimates reported in primary sources, suggesting that either (a) the impact of the Antonine Plague may have been exaggerated in the descriptions of ancient authors, or (b) the daily deaths in ca. 189 CE were caused by a different disease event than the Antonine Plague, or (c) seasonality might have been a significant factor changing the intensity of disease spread, with the population more severely affected during the winter months. Although none of the pathogens we analyzed emerged as the likely causative agent of the Antonine Plague, the models show that the overall mortality rate would have increased maximally by 7%. This result contradicts the mortality rate accepted by historians who defend the thesis of the significant impact of this epidemic on the demography of the Roman Empire.
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.