Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 735

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Imported chikungunya cases in an area newly colonised by Aedes albopictus: mathematical assessment of the best public health strategy

Open access
Sochacki, Thomas, Jourdain, Frédéric, Perrin, Yvon, Noel, Harold, Paty, Marie-Claire, de Valk, Henriette, Septfons, Alexandra, Simard, Frédéric, Fontenille, Didier, Roche, Benjamin·2016·Eurosurveillance

Abstract

We aimed to identify the optimal strategy that should be used by public health authorities against transmission of chikungunya virus in mainland France. The theoretical model we developed, which mimics the current surveillance system, predicted that without vector control (VC), the probability of local transmission after introduction of viraemic patients was around 2%, and the number of autochthonous cases between five and 15 persons per hectare, depending on the number of imported cases. Compared with this baseline, we considered different strategies (VC after clinical suspicion of a case or after laboratory confirmation, for imported or autochthonous cases): Awaiting laboratory confirmation for suspected imported cases to implement VC had no significant impact on the epidemiological outcomes analysed, mainly because of the delay before entering into the surveillance system. However, waiting for laboratory confirmation of autochthonous cases before implementing VC resulted in more frequent outbreaks. After analysing the economic cost of such strategies, our study suggested implementing VC immediately after the notification of a suspected autochthonous case as the most efficient strategy in settings where local transmission has been proven. Nevertheless, we identified that decreasing reporting time for imported cases should remain a priority.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2807/1560-7917.es.2016.21.18.30221

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 735

Metadata

Authors
Sochacki, T., Jourdain, F., Perrin, Y., Noel, H., Paty, M.-C., de Valk, H., Septfons, A., Simard, F., Fontenille, D., & Roche, B.
Venue
Eurosurveillance
Published
2016-05-05
Volume
21
Issue
18
ISSN
  • 1025-496X (ISSN-L)
  • 1560-7917
OpenAlex
W2393916105
Cited by
735
References
3
FWCI
60.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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: Imported chikungunya cases in an area newly colonised by Aedes albopictus: mathematical assessment of the best public health strategy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2807/1560-7917.es.2016.21.18.30221
The paper
Sochacki, T., Jourdain, F., Perrin, Y., Noel, H., Paty, M.-C., de Valk, H., Septfons, A., Simard, F., Fontenille, D., & Roche, B. (2016). Imported chikungunya cases in an area newly colonised by Aedes albopictus: mathematical assessment of the best public health strategy. Eurosurveillance. https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.es.2016.21.18.30221

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.