Cited by 2,514Mathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology ModelsCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesViral Infections and Outbreaks Research

Superspreading and the effect of individual variation on disease emergence

Open access
Lloyd-Smith, J. O., Schreiber, S. J., Kopp, P. E., Getz, W. M.·2005·Nature

Abstract

Population-level analyses often use average quantities to describe heterogeneous systems, particularly when variation does not arise from identifiable groups. A prominent example, central to our current understanding of epidemic spread, is the basic reproductive number, R0, which is defined as the mean number of infections caused by an infected individual in a susceptible population. Population estimates of R0 can obscure considerable individual variation in infectiousness, as highlighted during the global emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) by numerous ‘superspreading events’ in which certain individuals infected unusually large numbers of secondary cases. For diseases transmitted by non-sexual direct contacts, such as SARS or smallpox, individual variation is difficult to measure empirically, and thus its importance for outbreak dynamics has been unclear. Here we present an integrated theoretical and statistical analysis of the influence of individual variation in infectiousness on disease emergence. Using contact tracing data from eight directly transmitted diseases, we show that the distribution of individual infectiousness around R0 is often highly skewed. Model predictions accounting for this variation differ sharply from average-based approaches, with disease extinction more likely and outbreaks rarer but more explosive. Using these models, we explore implications for outbreak control, showing that individual-specific control measures outperform population-wide measures. Moreover, the dramatic improvements achieved through targeted control policies emphasize the need to identify predictive correlates of higher infectiousness. Our findings indicate that superspreading is a normal feature of disease spread, and to frame ongoing discussion we propose a rigorous definition for superspreading events and a method to predict their frequency.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature04153

Cites

101 of 101 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This characteristic of airborne viral transmission makes SARS particularly threatening because enhanced superspreading complicates the control of epidemics once community transmission is established.

    “This characteristic of airborne viral transmission makes SARS particularly threatening because enhanced superspreading complicates the control of epidemics once community transmission is established.35,62”

    From Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) mathematical models and disease parameters: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [35]

    The Main section (page unavailable) links SARS superspreading to explosive outbreaks and says that undiagnosed cases can cause further superspreading events despite control measures. It lists airborne spread as one possible contributor to superspreading across several infections, but does not establish it as the characteristic of SARS responsible for the claimed difficulty of control once community transmission is established. The paper also notes that high variation can make outbreaks more likely to die out. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • For SARS-CoV-1, airborne viral transmission across entire buildings through ventilation or drainage systems, as part of so-called superspreading events, is apparently a key driver.

    “For SARS-CoV-1, airborne viral transmission across entire buildings through ventilation or drainage systems, as part of so-called superspreading events, is apparently a key driver.”

    From Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) mathematical models and disease parameters: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [35]

    The Main section reports SARS superspreading and identifies airborne spread as one possible contributor to superspreading events across the infections reviewed. It does not say that SARS spread across entire buildings through ventilation or drainage systems, or establish that this route was a key driver. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The superspreading of SARS-CoV-1 was more prominent than that of many other viruses, including SARS-CoV-2.

    “Thus, the superspreading of SARS-CoV-1 was more prominent than that of many other viruses, 35 including SARS-CoV-2.117”

    From Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) mathematical models and disease parameters: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [35]

    The Main section reports highly uneven SARS transmission in the Singapore outbreak, and the Abstract describes SARS as having a strong tendency toward superspreading while contrasting it with the steadier growth of smallpox and pneumonic plague. The paper does not compare SARS-CoV-1 with SARS-CoV-2, so it cannot support that part of the claim. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lloyd-Smith, J. O., Schreiber, S. J., Kopp, P. E., & Getz, W. M.
Affiliations
  • William & Mary (US)
  • University of Hull (GB)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
Nature
Published
2005-11-17
Volume
438
Issue
7066
Pages
355-359
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2069251911
Cited by
2,514
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 131 · 2025: 124 · 2024: 136 · 2023: 148 · 2022: 216 · 2021: 356 · 2020: 343 · 2019: 102 · 2018: 99 · 2017: 86 · 2016: 108 · 2015: 110 · 2014: 86 · 2013: 88 · 2012: 74
FWCI
48.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • James S. McDonnell Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Mathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Viral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Keywords
superspreading events, disease emergence, basic reproduction number, outbreak dynamics, contact tracing, infectious disease transmission, SARS, measles, smallpox, pneumonic plague, avian influenza, bioterrorism agents, disease extinction
MeSH terms
Disease Outbreaks, Disease Susceptibility, Humans, Models, Biological, Singapore, Contact Tracing, Disease Transmission, Infectious, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review