The effect of the definition of ‘pandemic’ on quantitative assessments of infectious disease outbreak risk

Abstract In the early stages of an outbreak, the term ‘pandemic’ can be used to communicate about infectious disease risk, particularly by those who wish to encourage a large-scale public health response. However, the term lacks a widely accepted quantitative definition. We show that, under alternat...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Benjamin J. Singer, Robin N. Thompson, Michael B. Bonsall
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:
R
Q
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/85b84d4f6f1f4455bbdc12a6fbe65fdc
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
Descripción
Sumario:Abstract In the early stages of an outbreak, the term ‘pandemic’ can be used to communicate about infectious disease risk, particularly by those who wish to encourage a large-scale public health response. However, the term lacks a widely accepted quantitative definition. We show that, under alternate quantitative definitions of ‘pandemic’, an epidemiological metapopulation model produces different estimates of the probability of a pandemic. Critically, we show that using different definitions alters the projected effects of key parameters—such as inter-regional travel rates, degree of pre-existing immunity, and heterogeneity in transmission rates between regions—on the risk of a pandemic. Our analysis provides a foundation for understanding the scientific importance of precise language when discussing pandemic risk, illustrating how alternative definitions affect the conclusions of modelling studies. This serves to highlight that those working on pandemic preparedness must remain alert to the variability in the use of the term ‘pandemic’, and provide specific quantitative definitions when undertaking one of the types of analysis that we show to be sensitive to the pandemic definition.