Projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: An update and comparison with empirical data for the COVID-19 era.

Mathematical models have played a key role in understanding the spread of directly-transmissible infectious diseases such as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), as well as the effectiveness of public health responses. As the risk of contracting directly-transmitted infections depends on who interac...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kiesha Prem, Kevin van Zandvoort, Petra Klepac, Rosalind M Eggo, Nicholas G Davies, Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases COVID-19 Working Group, Alex R Cook, Mark Jit
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021-07-01
Series:PLoS Computational Biology
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009098
id doaj-e6c2d783497e47c6b5e0fbb9b3c7244c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e6c2d783497e47c6b5e0fbb9b3c7244c2021-08-16T04:32:09ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS Computational Biology1553-734X1553-73582021-07-01177e100909810.1371/journal.pcbi.1009098Projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: An update and comparison with empirical data for the COVID-19 era.Kiesha PremKevin van ZandvoortPetra KlepacRosalind M EggoNicholas G DaviesCentre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases COVID-19 Working GroupAlex R CookMark JitMathematical models have played a key role in understanding the spread of directly-transmissible infectious diseases such as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), as well as the effectiveness of public health responses. As the risk of contracting directly-transmitted infections depends on who interacts with whom, mathematical models often use contact matrices to characterise the spread of infectious pathogens. These contact matrices are usually generated from diary-based contact surveys. However, the majority of places in the world do not have representative empirical contact studies, so synthetic contact matrices have been constructed using more widely available setting-specific survey data on household, school, classroom, and workplace composition combined with empirical data on contact patterns in Europe. In 2017, the largest set of synthetic contact matrices to date were published for 152 geographical locations. In this study, we update these matrices with the most recent data and extend our analysis to 177 geographical locations. Due to the observed geographic differences within countries, we also quantify contact patterns in rural and urban settings where data is available. Further, we compare both the 2017 and 2020 synthetic matrices to out-of-sample empirically-constructed contact matrices, and explore the effects of using both the empirical and synthetic contact matrices when modelling physical distancing interventions for the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that the synthetic contact matrices show qualitative similarities to the contact patterns in the empirically-constructed contact matrices. Models parameterised with the empirical and synthetic matrices generated similar findings with few differences observed in age groups where the empirical matrices have missing or aggregated age groups. This finding means that synthetic contact matrices may be used in modelling outbreaks in settings for which empirical studies have yet to be conducted.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009098
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Kiesha Prem
Kevin van Zandvoort
Petra Klepac
Rosalind M Eggo
Nicholas G Davies
Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases COVID-19 Working Group
Alex R Cook
Mark Jit
spellingShingle Kiesha Prem
Kevin van Zandvoort
Petra Klepac
Rosalind M Eggo
Nicholas G Davies
Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases COVID-19 Working Group
Alex R Cook
Mark Jit
Projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: An update and comparison with empirical data for the COVID-19 era.
PLoS Computational Biology
author_facet Kiesha Prem
Kevin van Zandvoort
Petra Klepac
Rosalind M Eggo
Nicholas G Davies
Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases COVID-19 Working Group
Alex R Cook
Mark Jit
author_sort Kiesha Prem
title Projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: An update and comparison with empirical data for the COVID-19 era.
title_short Projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: An update and comparison with empirical data for the COVID-19 era.
title_full Projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: An update and comparison with empirical data for the COVID-19 era.
title_fullStr Projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: An update and comparison with empirical data for the COVID-19 era.
title_full_unstemmed Projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: An update and comparison with empirical data for the COVID-19 era.
title_sort projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: an update and comparison with empirical data for the covid-19 era.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS Computational Biology
issn 1553-734X
1553-7358
publishDate 2021-07-01
description Mathematical models have played a key role in understanding the spread of directly-transmissible infectious diseases such as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), as well as the effectiveness of public health responses. As the risk of contracting directly-transmitted infections depends on who interacts with whom, mathematical models often use contact matrices to characterise the spread of infectious pathogens. These contact matrices are usually generated from diary-based contact surveys. However, the majority of places in the world do not have representative empirical contact studies, so synthetic contact matrices have been constructed using more widely available setting-specific survey data on household, school, classroom, and workplace composition combined with empirical data on contact patterns in Europe. In 2017, the largest set of synthetic contact matrices to date were published for 152 geographical locations. In this study, we update these matrices with the most recent data and extend our analysis to 177 geographical locations. Due to the observed geographic differences within countries, we also quantify contact patterns in rural and urban settings where data is available. Further, we compare both the 2017 and 2020 synthetic matrices to out-of-sample empirically-constructed contact matrices, and explore the effects of using both the empirical and synthetic contact matrices when modelling physical distancing interventions for the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that the synthetic contact matrices show qualitative similarities to the contact patterns in the empirically-constructed contact matrices. Models parameterised with the empirical and synthetic matrices generated similar findings with few differences observed in age groups where the empirical matrices have missing or aggregated age groups. This finding means that synthetic contact matrices may be used in modelling outbreaks in settings for which empirical studies have yet to be conducted.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009098
work_keys_str_mv AT kieshaprem projectingcontactmatricesin177geographicalregionsanupdateandcomparisonwithempiricaldataforthecovid19era
AT kevinvanzandvoort projectingcontactmatricesin177geographicalregionsanupdateandcomparisonwithempiricaldataforthecovid19era
AT petraklepac projectingcontactmatricesin177geographicalregionsanupdateandcomparisonwithempiricaldataforthecovid19era
AT rosalindmeggo projectingcontactmatricesin177geographicalregionsanupdateandcomparisonwithempiricaldataforthecovid19era
AT nicholasgdavies projectingcontactmatricesin177geographicalregionsanupdateandcomparisonwithempiricaldataforthecovid19era
AT centreforthemathematicalmodellingofinfectiousdiseasescovid19workinggroup projectingcontactmatricesin177geographicalregionsanupdateandcomparisonwithempiricaldataforthecovid19era
AT alexrcook projectingcontactmatricesin177geographicalregionsanupdateandcomparisonwithempiricaldataforthecovid19era
AT markjit projectingcontactmatricesin177geographicalregionsanupdateandcomparisonwithempiricaldataforthecovid19era
_version_ 1721206044252700672