Instituto de Física Interdisciplinar y Sistemas Complejos IFISC (CSIC-UIB), Campus UIB, 07122, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
School of Mathematical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, E1 4NS, London, UK.
Sci Rep. 2022 Mar 9;12(1):3816. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-06720-8.
The ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has been holding the world hostage for several years now. Mobility is key to viral spreading and its restriction is the main non-pharmaceutical interventions to fight the virus expansion. Previous works have shown a connection between the structural organization of cities and the movement patterns of their residents. This puts urban centers in the focus of epidemic surveillance and interventions. Here we show that the organization of urban flows has a tremendous impact on disease spreading and on the amenability of different mitigation strategies. By studying anonymous and aggregated intra-urban flows in a variety of cities in the United States and other countries, and a combination of empirical analysis and analytical methods, we demonstrate that the response of cities to epidemic spreading can be roughly classified in two major types according to the overall organization of those flows. Hierarchical cities, where flows are concentrated primarily between mobility hotspots, are particularly vulnerable to the rapid spread of epidemics. Nevertheless, mobility restrictions in such types of cities are very effective in mitigating the spread of a virus. Conversely, in sprawled cities which present many centers of activity, the spread of an epidemic is much slower, but the response to mobility restrictions is much weaker and less effective. Investing resources on early monitoring and prompt ad-hoc interventions in more vulnerable cities may prove helpful in containing and reducing the impact of future pandemics.
目前,SARS-CoV-2 大流行已经持续了好几年,让全世界都陷入了困境。流动性是病毒传播的关键,限制流动性是抗击病毒扩散的主要非药物干预措施之一。先前的研究表明,城市的结构组织与其居民的流动模式之间存在联系。这使得城市中心成为疫情监测和干预的焦点。在这里,我们表明城市流动的组织对疾病传播以及不同缓解策略的适用性具有巨大影响。通过研究美国和其他国家的各种城市中的匿名和聚合的城市内流动,以及结合经验分析和分析方法,我们证明,根据这些流动的总体组织,城市对流行病传播的反应可以大致分为两种主要类型。层次化城市的流动主要集中在流动性热点之间,因此特别容易受到传染病的快速传播。然而,这种类型的城市中的流动性限制对于减轻病毒的传播非常有效。相反,在活动中心众多的蔓延型城市中,传染病的传播速度要慢得多,但对流动性限制的反应要弱得多,效果也差得多。在更脆弱的城市中投入资源进行早期监测和及时的临时干预,可能有助于控制和减轻未来大流行的影响。