Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Christ Church, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sci Rep. 2021 Jan 28;11(1):2547. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-81814-3.
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.
在疫情爆发的早期阶段，“大流行”一词可用于交流传染病风险，特别是那些希望鼓励大规模公共卫生应对的人。然而，这个术语缺乏广泛接受的定量定义。我们表明，在“大流行”的替代定量定义下，流行病学元种群模型会产生大流行概率的不同估计。关键的是，我们表明，使用不同的定义会改变关键参数（例如区域间旅行率、预先存在的免疫程度以及区域间传播率的异质性）对大流行风险的预测效果。我们的分析为理解在讨论大流行风险时使用精确语言的科学重要性提供了基础，说明了替代定义如何影响模型研究的结论。这表明，从事大流行准备工作的人员必须警惕“大流行”一词用法的变化，并在进行我们所展示的对大流行定义敏感的分析类型之一时提供具体的定量定义。
