ArticleNature human behaviour2026
Stochastic models indicate rapid smallpox spread and mass mortality of Indigenous Australians after colonial exposure.
Article in Nature human behaviour, 2026. 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.
- Smallpox in colonial Australia.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The impact of smallpox (variola) on Aboriginal communities in Australia beginning in 1789 was catastrophic and continues to cause intergenerational trauma. Historically biased perspectives and contemporary misinformation of the disease's introduction and spread impede modern-day truth-telling and efforts towards reconciliation and national healing. Understanding whether the disease entered and spread from pre-colonial Makassan (Indonesian) trade along the northern coast, or from the British First Fleet's arrival in southeastern Australia in 1788, is necessary to estimate the demographic impact. Here we developed stochastic, multipatch epidemiological models supported by systematic evaluation of historical observations to test hypotheses regarding possible disease entry points, spread rate and demographic impacts. Our models support the hypothesis that entry of the disease was in southeastern Australia. Even under ideal conditions and with higher-than-probable infection rates, simulations show that smallpox was unlikely to reach Sydney from a northern entry. We found no evidence that the 1789 epidemic was Australia-wide. Assuming 60% lethality based on global data, the loss of approximately 220,000 people would have occurred in these regions. While catastrophic to traditional Indigenous lifeways in the southeast, the disease also provided the catalyst for population decline and marginalization of Indigenous people in the face of expanding European populations. Our models indicate that it is unlikely that other parts of Australia were affected by the initial epidemic. We warn readers that the content of this study might be distressing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42426264What 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.