4.4 Article

Outbreak properties of epidemic models: The roles of temporal forcing and stochasticity on pathogen invasion dynamics

期刊

JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY
卷 271, 期 1, 页码 1-9

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.11.015

关键词

Master equations; Temporal variability; Infectious disease modelling; Invasion

资金

  1. Grantham Institute for Climate Change at Imperial College London
  2. NIH [RO1 AI069387-01A1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite temporally forced transmission driving many infectious diseases, analytical insight into its role when combined with stochastic disease processes and non-linear transmission has received little attention. During disease outbreaks, however, the absence of saturation effects early on in well-mixed populations mean that epidemic models may be linearised and we can calculate outbreak properties, including the effects of temporal forcing on fade-out, disease emergence and system dynamics, via analysis of the associated master equations. The approach is illustrated for the unforced and forced SIR and SEIR epidemic models. We demonstrate that in unforced models, initial conditions (and any uncertainty therein) play a stronger role in driving outbreak properties than the basic reproduction number R-0, while the same properties are highly sensitive to small amplitude temporal forcing, particularly when R-0 is small. Although illustrated for the SIR and SEIR models, the master equation framework may be applied to more realistic models, although analytical intractability scales rapidly with increasing system dimensionality. One application of these methods is obtaining a better understanding of the rate at which vector-borne and waterborne infectious diseases invade new regions given variability in environmental drivers, a particularly important question when addressing potential shifts in the global distribution and intensity of infectious diseases under climate change. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据