Title |
Super-spreaders in infectious diseases
|
---|---|
Published in |
International Journal of Infectious Diseases, July 2011
|
DOI | 10.1016/j.ijid.2010.06.020 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Richard A. Stein |
Abstract |
Early studies that explored host-pathogen interactions assumed that infected individuals within a population have equal chances of transmitting the infection to others. Subsequently, in what became known as the 20/80 rule, a small percentage of individuals within any population was observed to control most transmission events. This empirical rule was shown to govern inter-individual transmission dynamics for many pathogens in several species, and individuals who infect disproportionately more secondary contacts, as compared to most others, became known as super-spreaders. Studies conducted in the wake of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) pandemic revealed that, in the absence of super-spreading events, most individuals infect few, if any, secondary contacts. The analysis of SARS transmission, and reports from other outbreaks, unveil a complex scenario in which super-spreading events are shaped by multiple factors, including co-infection with another pathogen, immune suppression, changes in airflow dynamics, delayed hospital admission, misdiagnosis, and inter-hospital transfers. Predicting and identifying super-spreaders open significant medical and public health challenges, and represent important facets of infectious disease management and pandemic preparedness plans. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 19 | 18% |
United Kingdom | 8 | 7% |
Italy | 7 | 7% |
France | 3 | 3% |
Canada | 3 | 3% |
Netherlands | 2 | 2% |
Spain | 2 | 2% |
Argentina | 2 | 2% |
Poland | 1 | <1% |
Other | 5 | 5% |
Unknown | 55 | 51% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 89 | 83% |
Scientists | 9 | 8% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 5% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 9 | 2% |
Australia | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Spain | 1 | <1% |
Argentina | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 368 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 66 | 17% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 64 | 17% |
Student > Master | 48 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 33 | 9% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 5% |
Other | 78 | 20% |
Unknown | 74 | 19% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 80 | 21% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 67 | 18% |
Environmental Science | 17 | 4% |
Mathematics | 17 | 4% |
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 15 | 4% |
Other | 92 | 24% |
Unknown | 94 | 25% |