Who should get vaccinated first? An effective network information-driven priority vaccination strategy

  1. Dong Liu
  2. Chi Kong Tse
  3. Rosa H. M. Chan
  4. Choujun Zhan

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Approval of emergency use of the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in many countries has brought hope to ending the COVID-19 pandemic sooner. Considering the limited vaccine supply in the early stage of COVID-19 vaccination programs in most countries, a highly relevant question to ask is: who should get vaccinated first? In this article we propose a network information-driven vaccination strategy where a small number of people in a network (population) are categorized, according to a few key network properties, into priority groups. Using a network-based SEIR model for simulating the pandemic progression, the network information-driven vaccination strategy is compared with a random vaccination strategy. Results for both large-scale synthesized networks and real social networks have demonstrated that the network information-driven vaccination strategy can significantly reduce the cumulative number of infected individuals and lead to a more rapid containment of the pandemic. The results provide insight for policymakers in designing an effective early-stage vaccination plan.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.10.21256999: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.05.10.21256999v1 on medRxiv