2018
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006086
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Need for speed: An optimized gridding approach for spatially explicit disease simulations

Abstract: Numerical models for simulating outbreaks of infectious diseases are powerful tools for informing surveillance and control strategy decisions. However, large-scale spatially explicit models can be limited by the amount of computational resources they require, which poses a problem when multiple scenarios need to be explored to provide policy recommendations. We introduce an easily implemented method that can reduce computation time in a standard Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Removed (SEIR) model without intro… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, due to limited premises location information, the data were aggregated to the county level, and county-to-county transmission was simulated, tracking which counties contained one or more infectious premises. This enhanced version of the US Disease Outbreak Simulation (USDOS) expands on our previous model by increasing the granularity of simulations to the premises level, using a combination of generated premises locations [14] and a shortcut computational technique [15]. We then infer outcomes at larger geographical scales.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, due to limited premises location information, the data were aggregated to the county level, and county-to-county transmission was simulated, tracking which counties contained one or more infectious premises. This enhanced version of the US Disease Outbreak Simulation (USDOS) expands on our previous model by increasing the granularity of simulations to the premises level, using a combination of generated premises locations [14] and a shortcut computational technique [15]. We then infer outcomes at larger geographical scales.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Warwick model has been used to understand predictors of FMD transmission risk [ 53 ], identify high-risk areas [ 54 ], understand spatiotemporal process [ 55 ], evaluate mitigation strategies [ 56 , 57 ], determine optimal control strategies [ 58 , 59 ], guide policymakers [ 60 ], assist in real-time policy-making [ 61 ], understand the effect of vaccine availability constraints on epidemiologic and economic outcomes [ 62 ], estimate prevalence of asymptomatic carriers [ 63 ], understand the effect of livestock density vs. farm density [ 64 ], assess agreement between model outputs and epidemic data [ 65 ], understand the impact of the resolution of spatial data to inform control policies [ 66 ], and determine the predictor of final epidemic size [ 67 ] and computational advancement [ 68 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the purpose of computational speed, local spread is done in a grid, using the algorithm outlined in Sellman et al (2018). If infection was adjudged to happen, the susceptible farm has a number of susceptible animals proceed to the exposed/latent stage, drawn from a binomial distribution.…”
Section: Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mechanistic mathematical modelling can be a useful technique for exploratory analysis of the emergent dynamics of diseases, without the ethical considerations or expense of real‐world animal experiments, and allowing the dynamics of the system to emerge from the known characteristics of the disease in question. Much work has been done modelling FMD in epidemic settings (Björnham et al., 2020; Ferguson et al., 2001; Hayama et al., 2013; Kao, 2002; Keeling, 2001; Schley et al., 2009; Tildesley et al., 2008; Wada et al., 2017); however, relatively few studies have looked at FMD in endemic settings (Kim et al., 2016; McLachlan et al, 2019; Pomeroy et al., 2017; Ringa et al., 2014; Schnell et al., 2019). Of these, only Schnell et al.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%