BACKGROUND: Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) spread along sexual networks whose structural characteristics promote transmission that routine surveillance may not capture. Cases who have partners from multiple localities may operate as spatial network bridges, thereby facilitating geographical dissemination. We investigated how surveillance, sexual networks, and spatial bridges relate to each other for syphilis outbreaks in rural counties of North Carolina. METHODS: We selected from the state health department's surveillance database cases diagnosed with primary, secondary, or early latent syphilis during October 1998 to December 2002 and who resided in central and southeastern North Carolina, along with their sex partners and their social contacts irrespective of infection status. We applied matching algorithms to eliminate duplicate names and create a unique roster of partnerships from which networks were compiled and graphed. Network members were differentiated by disease status and county of residence. RESULTS: In the county most affected by the outbreak, densely connected networks indicative of STI outbreaks were consistent with increased incidence and a large case load. In other counties, the case loads were low with fluctuating incidence, but network structures suggested the presence of outbreaks. In a county with stable, low incidence and a high number of cases, the networks were sparse and dendritic, indicative of endemic spread. Outbreak counties exhibited densely connected networks within well-defined geographic boundaries and low connectivity between counties; spatial bridges did not seem to facilitate transmission. CONCLUSIONS: Simple visualization of sexual networks can provide key information to identify communities most in need of resources for outbreak investigation and disease control.
BACKGROUND: Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) spread along sexual networks whose structural characteristics promote transmission that routine surveillance may not capture. Cases who have partners from multiple localities may operate as spatial network bridges, thereby facilitating geographical dissemination. We investigated how surveillance, sexual networks, and spatial bridges relate to each other for syphilis outbreaks in rural counties of North Carolina. METHODS: We selected from the state health department's surveillance database cases diagnosed with primary, secondary, or early latent syphilis during October 1998 to December 2002 and who resided in central and southeastern North Carolina, along with their sex partners and their social contacts irrespective of infection status. We applied matching algorithms to eliminate duplicate names and create a unique roster of partnerships from which networks were compiled and graphed. Network members were differentiated by disease status and county of residence. RESULTS: In the county most affected by the outbreak, densely connected networks indicative of STI outbreaks were consistent with increased incidence and a large case load. In other counties, the case loads were low with fluctuating incidence, but network structures suggested the presence of outbreaks. In a county with stable, low incidence and a high number of cases, the networks were sparse and dendritic, indicative of endemic spread. Outbreak counties exhibited densely connected networks within well-defined geographic boundaries and low connectivity between counties; spatial bridges did not seem to facilitate transmission. CONCLUSIONS: Simple visualization of sexual networks can provide key information to identify communities most in need of resources for outbreak investigation and disease control.
Authors: Linda M Niccolai; Irina S Shcherbakova; Olga V Toussova; Andrei P Kozlov; Robert Heimer Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2009-06-09 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Irene A Doherty; Adaora A Adimora; Stephen Q Muth; Marc L Serre; Peter A Leone; William C Miller Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: William A Zule; Georgiy V Bobashev; Wendee M Wechsberg; Elizabeth C Costenbader; Curtis M Coomes Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2009-06-10 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Pamina M Gorbach; Ryan Murphy; Robert E Weiss; Christopher Hucks-Ortiz; Steven Shoptaw Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2009-06-19 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Sally C Stephens; Charles K Fann; Frank V Strona; Wendy Wolf; Stephanie E Cohen; Susan S Philip; Kyle T Bernstein Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Danielle F Haley; Gina M Wingood; Michael R Kramer; Regine Haardörfer; Adaora A Adimora; Anna Rubtsova; Andrew Edmonds; Neela D Goswami; Christina Ludema; DeMarc A Hickson; Catalina Ramirez; Zev Ross; Hector Bolivar; Hannah L F Cooper Journal: Arch Sex Behav Date: 2018-04-25
Authors: Penny S Loosier; Monique Carry; Amy Fasula; Kendra Hatfield-Timajchy; Susan A Jones; Jessica Harvill; Tracy Smith; Joseph McLaughlin Journal: J Community Health Date: 2021-02
Authors: Ann M Dennis; Andrew Cressman; Dana Pasquale; Simon D W Frost; Elizabeth Kelly; Jalila Guy; Victoria Mobley; Erika Samoff; Christopher B Hurt; Candice Mcneil; Lisa Hightow-Weidman; Monique Carry; Matthew Hogben; Arlene C Seña Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2022-02-11 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Dana K Pasquale; Irene A Doherty; William C Miller; Peter A Leone; Lynne A Sampson; Sue Lynn Ledford; Joseph Sebastian; Ann M Dennis Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 3.868
Authors: Dionne Gesink; Susan Wang; Tim Guimond; Lauren Kimura; James Connell; Travis Salway; Mark Gilbert; Sharmistha Mishra; Darrell Tan; Ann N Burchell; David J Brennan; Carmen H Logie; Daniel Grace Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 2.830