Transmission‐dynamics models for the SARS Coronavirus‐2
Transmission‐dynamics models for the SARS Coronavirus‐2
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/ajhb.23512
复制
发表时间：
2020-09
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
J. Jones;A. Hazel;Zack W. Almquist
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Jones;A. Hazel;Zack W. Almquist
传染病是人类经历的核心。它一直是人类种群选择的主要来源（Armelagos & Dewey，1970），因此人类基因组中许多在最近（即全新世以来）受到特别强选择的区域与免疫相关，可能是传染病的一个功能（Karlsson，Kwiatkowski，& Sabeti，2014）。传染病显然是我们理解世界人口的核心（Black，1975; Cockburn，1971）。继续到现在，传染病是人口健康的主要决定因素（Heesterbeek等人，2015年）和持续的社会经济不平等的关键贡献者（债券，基南，鲁哈尼，萨克斯，2010年;萨克斯和马拉尼，2002年）。因此，令人惊讶的是，在人类生物学和生物人类学领域，关于传染病动态及其对人群和人群中的个人的影响的正式工作相对较少。人类生物学仍然关注传染病的后果（例如，Dinkel等人，2020; Gurven，Kaplan，& Supa，2007; Houldcroft，Ramond，Rifkin，& Underdown，2017; Houldcroft & Underdown，2016; McDade et al.，2012年），但有少数例外（Hazel & Jones，2018; Hazel，Marino，& Simon，2015; Hazel，Ponngui-Wears，Davis，Low，& Foxman，2014;麦格拉思，1988; Nakazawa，Ohmae，石井，& Leafasia，1998; O 'Neil & Sattenspiel，2010; Sattenspiel，Koopman，Simon，& Jacquez，1990;厄本，1986年）通常没有整合从变速箱动态数学模型中推导出的丰富理论和方法。COVID-19大流行为这些研究团体提供了一个参与的机会。我们将把我们的迷你评论集中在我们认为可能与AJHB读者产生共鸣的主题上。在介绍了传染病传播动力学模型的形式主义以及这些模型如何用于深入了解SARS冠状病毒2（COVID-19的病原体）的起源、扩增和传播之后，我们将转向人类学家特别感兴趣的主题：人口结构在影响传播动态、地理和流动性方面的作用，社会经济和健康不平等的简单模式及其对流行病控制的影响，以及结构化人际关系的后果，如使用网络正式化的疾病传播和控制。
Infectious disease is central to the human experience. It has served as a major source of selection on human populations (Armelagos & Dewey, 1970) and consequently many of the regions of the human genome that have been under particularly strong selection in the recent past (ie, since Holocene) are immune-related and presumably a function of infectious disease (Karlsson, Kwiatkowski, & Sabeti, 2014). Infectious disease is clearly central to our understanding of the peopling of the world (Black, 1975; Cockburn, 1971). Continuing to the present, infectious disease is a major determinant of population health (Heesterbeek et al., 2015) and a key contributor to persistent socio-economic inequality (Bonds, Keenan, Rohani, & Sachs, 2010; Sachs & Malaney, 2002). It is therefore surprising that there has been relatively little formal work on infectious disease dynamics and their consequences for populations and individuals embedded within populations within the fields of Human Biology and Biological Anthropology. Human biology remains concerned with the consequences of infectious disease (eg, Dinkel et al., 2020; Gurven, Kaplan, & Supa, 2007; Houldcroft, Ramond, Rifkin, & Underdown, 2017; Houldcroft & Underdown, 2016; McDade et al., 2012), but with precious few exceptions (Hazel & Jones, 2018; Hazel, Marino, & Simon, 2015; Hazel, Ponnaluri-Wears, Davis, Low, & Foxman, 2014; McGrath, 1988; Nakazawa, Ohmae, Ishii, & Leafasia, 1998; O'Neil & Sattenspiel, 2010; Sattenspiel, Koopman, Simon, & Jacquez, 1990; Upham, 1986) generally does not integrate the rich body of theory and methodology derived from mathematical models of transmission dynamics. The COVID-19 pandemic presents an opportunity to engage these research communities. We will focus our mini-review on topics that we think are likely to resonate with the readership of AJHB. After introducing the formalisms of transmission-dynamics models for infectious disease and how these models have been used to gain insight into the origin, amplification, and dissemination of the SARS Coronavirus-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, we will turn to topics of particular interest for anthropologists: the role population structure plays in shaping transmission dynamics, geography and mobility, simple models of socio-economic and health inequality and their implications for epidemic control, and the consequences for structured interpersonal relations, as formalized using networks, for disease transmission and control.