↓ Skip to main content

Epidemic Spread on Weighted Networks

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Epidemic Spread on Weighted Networks
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, December 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003352
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christel Kamp, Mathieu Moslonka-Lefebvre, Samuel Alizon

Abstract

The contact structure between hosts shapes disease spread. Most network-based models used in epidemiology tend to ignore heterogeneity in the weighting of contacts between two individuals. However, this assumption is known to be at odds with the data for many networks (e.g. sexual contact networks) and to have a critical influence on epidemics' behavior. One of the reasons why models usually ignore heterogeneity in transmission is that we currently lack tools to analyze weighted networks, such that most studies rely on numerical simulations. Here, we present a novel framework to estimate key epidemiological variables, such as the rate of early epidemic expansion (r0) and the basic reproductive ratio (R0), from joint probability distributions of number of partners (contacts) and number of interaction events through which contacts are weighted. These distributions are much easier to infer than the exact shape of the network, which makes the approach widely applicable. The framework also allows for a derivation of the full time course of epidemic prevalence and contact behaviour, which we validate with numerical simulations on networks. Overall, incorporating more realistic contact networks into epidemiological models can improve our understanding of the emergence and spread of infectious diseases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 3%
United Kingdom 3 3%
Switzerland 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 104 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 29%
Researcher 21 18%
Student > Master 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Professor 6 5%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 12 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 16%
Mathematics 17 15%
Computer Science 11 9%
Physics and Astronomy 9 8%
Engineering 9 8%
Other 32 27%
Unknown 20 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 November 2014.
All research outputs
#6,565,445
of 25,980,896 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#4,411
of 9,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,258
of 322,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#66
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,980,896 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,091 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,859 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.