MATHEMATICAL STUDY OF THE IMPACT OF QUARANTINE, ISOLATION AND VACCINATION IN CURTAILING AN EPIDEMIC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The quarantine of suspected cases and isolation of individuals with symptoms are two of the primary public health control measures for combating the spread of a communicable emerging or re-emerging disease. Implementing these measures, however, can inflict significant socio-economic and psychological costs. This paper presents a deterministic compartmental model for assessing the single and combined impact of quarantine and isolation to contain an epidemic. Comparisons are made with a mass vaccination program. The model is simulated using parameters for influenza-type diseases such as SARS. The study shows that even for an epidemic in which asymptomatic transmission does not occur, the quarantine of asymptomatically-infected individuals can be more effective than only isolating individuals with symptoms, if the associated reproductive number is high enough. For the case where asymptomatic transmission occurs, it is shown that isolation is more effective for a disease with a small basic reproduction number and transmission coefficient of asymptomatically-infected individuals. If asymptomatic individuals transmit at a rate that is at least 20% that of symptomatic individuals, quarantine is always more effective. The study further shows that the reduction in disease burden obtained from a combined quarantine and isolation program can be comparable to that obtained by a vaccination program, if the former is implemented quickly enough after the onset of the outbreak. If the implementation of such a quarantine/isolation program is delayed, however, even for a short while, its effectiveness decreases rapidly.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".