Social encounter networks: characterizing Great Britain

A major goal of infectious disease epidemiology is to understand and predict the spread of infections within human populations, with the intention of better informing decisions regarding control and intervention. However, the development of fully mechanistic models of transmission requires a quantitative understanding of social interactions and collective properties of social networks. We performed a cross-sectional study of the social contacts on given days for more than 5000 respondents in England, Scotland and Wales, through postal and online survey methods. The survey was designed to elicit detailed and previously unreported measures of the immediate social network of participants relevant to infection spread. Here, we describe individual-level contact patterns, focusing on the range of heterogeneity observed and discuss the correlations between contact patterns and other socio-demographic factors. We find that the distribution of the number of contacts approximates a power-law distribution, but postulate that total contact time (which has a shorter-tailed distribution) is more epidemiologically relevant. We observe that children, public-sector and healthcare workers have the highest number of total contact hours and are therefore most likely to catch and transmit infectious disease. Our study also quantifies the transitive connections made between an individual's contacts (or clustering); this is a key structural characteristic of social networks with important implications for disease transmission and control efficacy. Respondents' networks exhibit high levels of clustering, which varies across social settings and increases with duration, frequency of contact and distance from home. Finally, we discuss the implications of these findings for the transmission and control of pathogens spread through close contact.

[1]  Aravind Srinivasan,et al.  Modelling disease outbreaks in realistic urban social networks , 2004, Nature.

[2]  M. Keeling,et al.  Disease evolution on networks: the role of contact structure , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[3]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[4]  Alessandro Vespignani,et al.  Velocity and hierarchical spread of epidemic outbreaks in scale-free networks. , 2003, Physical review letters.

[5]  Matt J. Keeling,et al.  Social encounter networks: collective properties and disease transmission , 2012, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[6]  P. E. Kopp,et al.  Superspreading and the effect of individual variation on disease emergence , 2005, Nature.

[7]  W. Edmunds,et al.  Dynamic social networks and the implications for the spread of infectious disease , 2008, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[8]  M Aerts,et al.  Social mixing patterns for transmission models of close contact infections: exploring self-evaluation and diary-based data collection through a web-based interface , 2006, Epidemiology and Infection.

[9]  A. King,et al.  Contact Network Structure Explains the Changing Epidemiology of Pertussis , 2010, Science.

[10]  Matt J. Keeling,et al.  Networks and the Epidemiology of Infectious Disease , 2010, Interdisciplinary perspectives on infectious diseases.

[11]  M. Keeling,et al.  The effects of local spatial structure on epidemiological invasions , 1999, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[12]  W. Edmunds,et al.  Who mixes with whom? A method to determine the contact patterns of adults that may lead to the spread of airborne infections , 1997, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[13]  Matt J. Keeling,et al.  Targeting vaccination against novel infections: risk, age and spatial structure for pandemic influenza in Great Britain , 2010, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[14]  M. Clarke,et al.  Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[15]  Alessandro Vespignani,et al.  Epidemic spreading in scale-free networks. , 2000, Physical review letters.

[16]  L. Amaral,et al.  The web of human sexual contacts , 2001, Nature.

[17]  M. Jit,et al.  Vaccination against pandemic influenza A/H1N1v in England: a real-time economic evaluation. , 2010, Vaccine.

[18]  Ciro Cattuto,et al.  What's in a crowd? Analysis of face-to-face behavioral networks , 2010, Journal of theoretical biology.

[19]  A. J. Hall Infectious diseases of humans: R. M. Anderson & R. M. May. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press, 1991. viii + 757 pp. Price £50. ISBN 0-19-854599-1 , 1992 .

[20]  Herbert W. Hethcote,et al.  Gonorrhea modeling: a comparison of control methods , 1982 .

[21]  J. Hassi,et al.  Does non-responder bias have a significant effect on the results in a postal questionnaire study? , 2004, European Journal of Epidemiology.

[22]  Matt J Keeling,et al.  Contact tracing and disease control , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[23]  R W Scholz,et al.  Collecting close-contact social mixing data with contact diaries: reporting errors and biases , 2011, Epidemiology and Infection.

[24]  R. Mikolajczyk,et al.  Social Contacts and Mixing Patterns Relevant to the Spread of Infectious Diseases , 2008, PLoS medicine.

[25]  M. Keeling,et al.  Modeling Infectious Diseases in Humans and Animals , 2007 .

[26]  M. Keeling,et al.  Networks and epidemic models , 2005, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[27]  Matt J. Keeling,et al.  Modelling the impact of local reactive school closures on critical care provision during an influenza pandemic , 2011, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[28]  R. May,et al.  Infection dynamics on scale-free networks. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[29]  Matt J. Keeling,et al.  The Impact of Contact Tracing in Clustered Populations , 2010, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[30]  J. Medlock,et al.  Optimizing Influenza Vaccine Distribution , 2009, Science.