Nature

FIGURE 4. Social distance measures.

From the following article:

Strategies for containing an emerging influenza pandemic in Southeast Asia

Neil M. Ferguson, Derek A.T. Cummings, Simon Cauchemez, Christophe Fraser, Steven Riley, Aronrag Meeyai, Sopon Iamsirithaworn and Donald S. Burke

Nature 437, 209-214 (8 September 2005)

doi: 10.1038/nature04017

BACK TO ARTICLE

a, b, Same as Fig. 3a, b, but showing the effect of drug-sparing prophylaxis (50,000 courses per case, as Fig. 3e) together with: no social distance measures (red; as Fig. 3); 21-day closure of 90% of schools and 50% of workplaces within 5 km of a detected case (blue); 80% 'area quarantine' (that is, 80% reduction of movement in and out of a zone defined by merging 5-km rings around all detected cases) for 21 days (magenta); or a combination of school/workplace closure and area quarantine (green). c, Same as a but showing the effect of limiting availability of antiviral drugs to 1, 3 or 5 million courses on the effectiveness of the combined area quarantine and 5-km radial prophylaxis policy. d, Same as c but for drug-sparing geographic prophylaxis (50,000 courses per case) plus area quarantine. e, Case incidence over time without pandemic control measures and with the 3 million course policy of d, showing the approximate one-month delay achieved even when containment is unsuccessful (R0 = 1.9). f, Same as a but showing the reduction in policy effectiveness seen if the combined school/workplace closure and drug-sparing prophylaxis policy is restricted to Thailand alone. Error bars show exact 95% confidence limits.

Figures & Tables index
BACK TO ARTICLE