MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059071616 · doi:10.1001/jama.290.21.2876

Mathematical Models of Isolation and Quarantine

2003· article· en· W2059071616 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carlos Castillo‐Chávez

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuarantineIsolation (microbiology)PopulationHerd immunityVaccinationDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)RubellaDilemmaIntensive care medicinePandemicImmunologyEnvironmental healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MeaslesBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

THE RECENT EMERGENCE OF SEVERE ACUTE RESPIRATORY syndrome (SARS) has drawn attention to the strategies of isolation and quarantine (I&Q) as a method of disease control. The fundamental dilemma associated with the implementation of I&Q is how to predict the populationlevel efficacy of individual quarantine: Which and how many individuals need to be quarantined to achieve effective control at the population level? Although some forms of I&Q have proven effective in SARS, 1,2 they are not appropriate for all infectious diseases. Diseases like varicella, for which costs of quarantine may be high (many work and school days are lost when noninfected contacts are kept at home) and the return minimal (a relatively mild disease is avoided), require a different approach. Furthermore, in some cases, I&Q may be not only costly but harmful. An I&Q policy for varicella, in the long run, may actually increase the average age (and therefore the severity) of first infection. Using I&Q to control rubella in China could actually lead to higher levels of disease because under the current system (of no control), about 97% of the population has rubella antibodies obtained from direct exposure to infectious individuals. 2 Such a level of natural immunity would be impossible to accomplish under the current effective US and Canadian vaccination policies. Mathematical modeling can help determine when I&Q arethebeststrategiesfordiseasecontrolaswellashowthey might affect short- and long-term disease dynamics. Mathematical modeling offers ways of integrating populationlevel knowledge based on previous epidemics with availableindividualandpopulationdatatopredicttheoutcomes of several alternative scenarios. This kind of mathematical epidemiologyisparticularlywellsuitedtoproblemsforwhich formal experimentation is impossible for logistical or ethical reasons. In these situations, mathematical models can play a role in planning and experimental design in epidemiology, ecology, and immunology. Mathematical disease modeling is an attempt to fit empirical data to abstract processes. Decisions must always be made about which variables to exclude from the model. Although inclusion of more variables (for example, the baselinehealthstatusofeveryindividual)wouldmakethemodel more accurate, such models would be impossibly complex. The balance between predictive power and its level of detail depends on the questions the model is intended to answer. Variables that can influence the outcome of I&Q policies include the number of contacts an infected person has per unit of time, the probability of infection per contact, and the proportion of the population that is vacci

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.217
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations80
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMASame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207