Dynamic contact data can be used to inform disease transmission models, providing insight into the dynamics of infectious diseases. Such data often requires extensive processing for use in models or analysis. Therefore, processing decisions can potentially influence the topology of the contact network and the simulated disease transmission dynamics on the network. In this study, we examine how four processing decisions, including temporal sampling window (TSW), spatial threshold of contact (SpTh), minimum contact duration (MCD), and temporal aggregation (daily or hourly) influence the information content of contact data (indicated by changes in entropy) as well as disease transmission model dynamics. We found that changes made to information content by processing decisions translated to significant impacts to the transmission dynamics of disease models using the contact data. In particular, we found that SpTh had the largest independent influence on information content, and that some output metrics (R
0
, time to peak infection) were more sensitive to changes in information than others (epidemic extent). These findings suggest that insights gained from transmission modeling using dynamic contact data can be influenced by processing decisions alone, emphasizing the need to carefully consideration them prior to using contact-based models to conduct analyses, compare different datasets, or inform policy decisions.
The
intrinsic metabolic clearance rate (Clint) and the
fraction of the chemical unbound in plasma (f
up) serve as important parameters for high-throughput toxicokinetic
(TK) models, but experimental data are limited for many chemicals.
Open-source quantitative structure–activity relationship (QSAR)
models for both parameters were developed to offer reliable in silico predictions for a diverse set of chemicals regulated
under the U.S. law, including pharmaceuticals, pesticides, and industrial
chemicals. As a case study to demonstrate their utility, model predictions
served as inputs to the TK component of a risk-based prioritization
approach based on bioactivity/exposure ratios (BERs), in which a BER
< 1 indicates that exposures are predicted to exceed a biological
activity threshold. When applied to a subset of the Tox21 screening
library (6484 chemicals), we found that the proportion of chemicals
with BER <1 was similar using either in silico (1133/6484; 17.5%) or in vitro (148/848; 17.5%)
parameters. Further, when considering only the chemicals in the Tox21
set with in vitro data, there was a high concordance
of chemicals classified with either BER <1 or >1 using either in silico or in vitro parameters (767/848,
90.4%). Thus, the presented QSARs may be suitable for prioritizing
the risk posed by many chemicals for which measured in vitro TK data are lacking.
One contribution of 9 to a theme issue 'Multiscale dynamics of infectious diseases'.Many pathogens are able to replicate or survive in abiotic environments. Disease transmission models that include environmental reservoirs and environment-to-host transmission have used a variety of functional forms and modelling frameworks without a clear connection to pathogen ecology or space and time scales. We present a conceptual framework to organize microparasites based on the role that abiotic environments play in their lifecycle. Mean-field and individual-based models for environmental transmission are analysed and compared. We show considerable divergence between both modelling approaches when conditions do not facilitate well mixing and for pathogens with fast dynamics in the environment. We conclude with recommendations for modelling environmentally transmitted pathogens based on the pathogen lifecycle and time and spatial scales of the host-pathogen system under consideration.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.