***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****
I would agree with everything that's already been said.
If you haven't already found them, I'm aware of at least two papers that
have tried to look at polio transmission on networks. A big limitation is the
lack of empirical data on the structure of relevant networks.
K Jong-Hoon & R Seong-Hwan, Transmission dynamics of oral polio vaccine
viruses and vaccine-derived polioviruses on networks, Journal of
Theoretical Biology, v 364, pp. 266-274, 2015.
H Rahmandad et al., Development of an individual-based model for
polioviruses: implications of the selection of network type and outcome
metrics, Epidemiology and Infection, v 139, pp. 836-848, 2011.
My own view is that there are at least two different network angles here.
One is an epidemiological view that focuses on transmission. Transmission
through social networks would be one part of that, and “ring vaccination”
would be a common strategy response. Most of the work I’ve seen
on “ring vaccination” was around person-person transmission. Where
transmission is by the oral-faecal route other strategies could be
considered. It might even be that a person-place bipartite network offers
some insight if certain unsanitary places are the sources of most infections.
The second network angle is driven by increasing uptake of the vaccine.
Perhaps vaccinating key people or finding people to be advocates of
vaccination will lead others to do it too. Then the key is to understand who
trusts whom or who is influenced by whom to maximize the effectiveness
of the strategy. To me, this requires a deeper understanding of the social
structure of the area.
Either way, a big challenge would be lack of data.
SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.