Mathematical modeling compares intervention impacts on tuberculosis in social networks vs. all-to-all models, suggesting insights for future targeting.
Background Mathematical models guide tuberculosis (TB) target-setting, yet most assume homogeneous “all-to-all” mixing. We compared projected intervention impacts between an all-to-all compartmental model and a Barabási–Albert (BA) scale‑free social network model under otherwise identical disease assumptions. Methods We calibrated transmission parameters so both models produced similar baseline trends, then introduced vaccination (coverage 30–70%; efficacy 80–95%) and treatment (20–50% increases in recovery) after a 400‑day burn‑in. Outcomes were assessed 300 days post‑intervention. Results Under 60% coverage, increasing vaccine efficacy from 80% to 95% yielded smaller projected reductions in active TB with the network model than with all‑to‑all mixing. Treatment improvements showed the same pattern: lower reductions under the network than the all‑to‑all model at modest efficacy, converging at high efficacy/coverage. Findings were robust across baseline prevalence scenarios. Conclusions Accounting for social networks can attenuate projected impacts for sub‑optimal TB interventions. Forecasts and target‑setting should include sensitivity to social network structure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Milali et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: