The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The construction and analysis of epidemic trees with reference to the 2001 UK foot–and–mouth outbreak
Open accessAbstract
The case-reproduction ratio for the spread of an infectious disease is a critically important concept for understanding dynamics of epidemics and for evaluating impact of control measures on spread of infection. Reliable estimation of this ratio is a problem central to epidemiology and is most often accomplished by fitting dynamic models to data and estimating combinations of parameters that equate to the case-reproduction ratio. Here, we develop a novel parameter-free method that permits direct estimation of the history of transmission events recoverable from detailed observation of a particular epidemic. From these reconstructed 'epidemic trees', case-reproduction ratios can be estimated directly. We develop a bootstrap algorithm that generates percentile intervals for these estimates that shows the procedure to be both precise and robust to possible uncertainties in the historical reconstruction. Identifying and 'pruning' branches from these trees whose occurrence might have been prevented by implementation of more stringent control measures permits estimation of the possible efficacy of these alternative measures. Examination of the cladistic structure of these trees as a function of the distance of each case from its infection source reveals useful insights about the relationship between long-distance transmission events and epidemic size. We demonstrate the utility of these methods by applying them to data from the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in the UK.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Woolhouse, M. E. J., Dye, C., Etard, J.-F., Smith, T., Charlwood, J. D., Garnett, G. P., Hagan, P., Hii, J. L. K., Ndhlovu, P. D., Quinnell, R. J., et al. (1997) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.94.1.338 · Cited by 1,194
Self-citation
Cited by
Mathematical models of infectious disease transmission
Grassly, N. C., & Fraser, C. (2008) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro1845 · Cited by 744
Modelling vaccination strategies against foot-and-mouth disease
Keeling, M. J., Woolhouse, M. E. J., May, R. M., Davies, G., & Grenfell, B. T. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01343 · Cited by 444
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Haydon, D. T., Chase–Topping, M., Shaw, D. J., Matthews, L., Friar, J. K., Wilesmith, J., & Woolhouse, M. E. J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2003-01-22
- Volume
- 270
- Issue
- 1511
- Pages
- 121-127
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- OpenAlex
- W1980099211
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 21.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The construction and analysis of epidemic trees with reference to the 2001 UK foot–and–mouth outbreak. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspb.2002.2191
- The paper
- Haydon, D. T., Chase–Topping, M., Shaw, D. J., Matthews, L., Friar, J. K., Wilesmith, J., & Woolhouse, M. E. J. (2003). The construction and analysis of epidemic trees with reference to the 2001 UK foot–and–mouth outbreak. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2191
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.