Literature DB >> 25514905

Transmissibility of the Ice Bucket Challenge among globally influential celebrities: retrospective cohort study.

Michael Y Ni1, Brandford H Y Chan2, Gabriel M Leung2, Eric H Y Lau2, Herbert Pang2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the transmissibility of the Ice Bucket Challenge among globally influential celebrities and to identify associated risk factors.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
SETTING: Social media (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram). PARTICIPANTS: David Beckham, Cristiano Ronaldo, Benedict Cumberbatch, Stephen Hawking, Mark Zuckerberg, Oprah Winfrey, Homer Simpson, and Kermit the Frog were defined as index cases. We included contacts up to the fifth generation seeded from each index case and enrolled a total of 99 participants into the cohort. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Basic reproduction number R0, serial interval of accepting the challenge, and odds ratios of associated risk factors based on fully observed nomination chains; R0 is a measure of transmissibility and is defined as the number of secondary cases generated by a single index in a fully susceptible population. Serial interval is the duration between onset of a primary case and onset of its secondary cases.
RESULTS: Based on the empirical data and assuming a branching process we estimated a mean R0 of 1.43 (95% confidence interval 1.23 to 1.65) and a mean serial interval for accepting the challenge of 2.1 days (median 1 day). Higher log (base 10) net worth of the participants was positively associated with transmission (odds ratio 1.63, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 2.50), adjusting for age and sex.
CONCLUSIONS: The Ice Bucket Challenge was moderately transmissible among a group of globally influential celebrities, in the range of the pandemic A/H1N1 2009 influenza. The challenge was more likely to be spread by richer celebrities, perhaps in part reflecting greater social influence. © Ni et al 2014.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25514905      PMCID: PMC4267700          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g7185

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


Introduction

The Ice Bucket Challenge, a campaign to raise awareness and support for people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis,1 is widely recognised to have gone socially viral. Although there are variations to the trial, participants typically complete the challenge (they are doused in ice water or make a donation) and nominate three others to undertake it.2 As of 1 September 2014, more than 17 million videos related to the Ice Bucket Challenge were shared on Facebook alone, and these were viewed more than 10 billion times by more than 440 million people.3 Socially viral phenomena include videos that are made popular by sharing on the internet, and a video is said to have gone viral if it spreads rapidly as a result of frequent sharing.4 5 However, the infectious disease modelling framework has seldom been used to quantify the transmissibility of such socially viral phenomena.6 The most commonly used metric of transmissibility is the basic reproduction number (R0), defined as the number of secondary cases generated by a single index in a fully susceptible population.7 The value of R0 is a major determinant of the size of an epidemic, and an infection can only be self sustaining if R0 is greater than 1. The R0 also provides a measure of the effort required to control the epidemic.7 8 We estimated the transmissibility of the Ice Bucket Challenge among globally influential celebrities and identified the associated risk factors.

Methods

Participants

We considered globally influential celebrities who had undertaken the Ice Bucket Challenge to be eligible for inclusion. Global influence was defined by the criteria: listed in TIME 100: The Most Influential People in the World9 or TIME: Great People of the 20th Century,10 or having at least five million view counts for the Ice Bucket Challenge on YouTube. Among the small pool of potentially eligible participants we arbitrarily chose David Beckham, Cristiano Ronaldo, Benedict Cumberbatch, Stephen Hawking, Mark Zuckerberg, Oprah Winfrey, Homer Simpson, and Kermit the Frog as index cases (table 1). We also included successful nominations up to the fifth generation seeded from each index case.
Table 1

 Personal information, individual R0, and total number of successful contacts of celebrities taking part in the Ice Bucket Challenge in each nomination chain up to fifth generation for each index case

Index caseAge (years)ProfessionNet worth ($000 000)R0*Total No of successful contacts
David Beckham39Sports350310
Cristiano Ronaldo29Sports250113
Benedict Cumberbatch38Artist1527
Stephen Hawking72Scientist2022
Mark Zuckerberg30Entrepreneur33 300341
Oprah Winfrey60Entrepreneur2900320
Homer SimpsonUnknownNuclear safety inspectorUnknown11
Kermit the FrogUnknownEntertainerUnknown11

*Measure of transmissibility.

$1.00 (£0.64; €0.81).

Personal information, individual R0, and total number of successful contacts of celebrities taking part in the Ice Bucket Challenge in each nomination chain up to fifth generation for each index case *Measure of transmissibility. $1.00 (£0.64; €0.81).

Data collection

We completed a marathon viewing of 145 Ice Bucket Challenges up to 13 September 2014. For each case we recorded the age, sex, occupation, net worth, popularity (proxied by number of likes on Facebook and number of Twitter followers), number of successful nominations, and total number of nominations. We obtained personal details of the celebrities from Wikipedia and specialised websites, although the validity of such information cannot be reliably ascertained.11 Wikipedia has been used in previous studies12 13 and its comparative accuracy has been reported.14 From verified accounts we obtained the number of Facebook likes and Twitter followers. Where these were not available, we used the unofficial accounts with the most likes or followers. We excluded unofficial accounts with fewer than 1000 likes or followers. We traced contacts through Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Online written or video responses by the nominated contacts were used to determine completion of the challenge. If we found no evidence for a response to the challenge on social media, it was assumed that the contact had declined. We included all successful contacts. Two of the authors (MYN, BHYC) independently collected the data. After the fifth generation seeded from each index case they stopped data collection owing to investigator fatigue. We did not seek previous consent from participants as they presumably participated in the Ice Bucket Challenge without coercion, albeit with varying degrees of peer and social pressure.

Statistical analysis

We used fully observed nomination chains to estimate the R0, a measure of transmissibility, for a celebrities based cohort, up to the fifth generation seeded from each index case (the first generation). R0 was estimated as the product of the mean number of nominations (n) and the probability of successful nomination (p), assuming a branching process in which each participant of the Ice Bucket Challenge generates a random number of next generation participants. To account for the fact that the challenge had already taken off in early August 2014,15 we excluded nominees in the calculation of p who had previously completed the challenge (that is, were “immune” from future participation) but included them in the calculation of n so that the estimated R0 would reflect the transmissibility in a fully “susceptible” population. We obtained 95% confidence intervals of the R0 estimate by bootstrap with 1000 replications. Mean serial interval was calculated by assuming at least a half day delay in accepting the challenge, based on all nominator-nominee pairs in our dataset. We used multivariable ordinal logistic regression to examine the association between number of successful nominations and personal factors (age, sex, occupation, and net worth) or popularity (number of likes on Facebook and number of followers on Twitter). To handle missing data we carried out sensitivity analysis with multiple imputation. All analyses were done using R version 3.0.2 and SAS university edition, 2014.

Results

Eight index cases complied with the inclusion criteria. In total we included 91 nominees up to the fifth generation seeded from each index case, and a total of 99 participants were enrolled into the cohort. Overall, 24.2% of participants had zero successful nominations, 32.3% had one, 26.3% had two, and 17.2% had three. Twelve (4.9%) out of the 247 nominations had already participated in the Ice Bucket Challenge and were therefore “immune” from future participation. Among those observed were a Nobel laureate, a university vice chancellor, “heart throbs”, and Muppets (both the actors and the puppets). Among the index cases, Mark Zuckerberg’s nomination chain produced the most successful number of contacts (total of 41) up to the fifth generation (figure). No serious adverse events arising from the Ice Bucket Challenge act were observed in this series, but adverse events have been reported elsewhere,16 including falls, head injuries, a temporomandibular joint dislocation, cuts, and at least one fatality. We estimated the measure of transmissibility, R0, to be 1.43 (95% confidence interval 1.23 to 1.65) and a mean serial interval of accepting the challenge of 2.1 days (median 1 day). We excluded Homer Simpson and Kermit the Frog in the regression models because of difficulty in ascertaining their personal characteristics. Participants with a higher log (base 10) net worth were more likely to spread the Ice Bucket challenge (odds ratio 1.63, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 2.50), adjusted for age and sex. One unit change on a log (base 10) scale is equivalent to a 10-fold change in net worth. We tested the proportional odds assumption for the regression model and found no indication of violation. Age, sex, occupation, number of Facebook likes, or number of Twitter followers were not associated with transmissibility (table 2). Data were missing for 24.0% of net worth, 15.6% of Facebook likes, and 13.5% of Twitter followers. Sensitivity analysis by multiple imputation yielded similar results (not shown).

Tree structure of nominations associated with index case Mark Zuckerberg

Table 2

 Association of personal characteristics with basic reproduction number* (R0), in the celebrities based cohort of the Ice Bucket Challenge, 2014

CharacteristicsOdds ratio (95% CI)
Age (years)1.01 (0.98 to 1.04)
Female sex0.80 (0.38 to 1.68)
Occupational sector:
 ArtsReference
 Business2.23 (0.89 to 5.59)
 Government1.39 (0.11 to 18.0)
 Sports1.15 (0.34 to 3.93)
 Science0.51 (0.09 to 3.10)
Log (net worth)1.63 (1.06 to 2.50)
Log (Facebook likes)1.23 (0.87 to 1.72)
Log (Twitter followers)1.46 (0.96 to 2.22)

*Measure of transmissibility.

Tree structure of nominations associated with index case Mark Zuckerberg Association of personal characteristics with basic reproduction number* (R0), in the celebrities based cohort of the Ice Bucket Challenge, 2014 *Measure of transmissibility.

Discussion

The Ice Bucket Challenge—a campaign to raise awareness and support for people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis by dousing oneself with a bucket of iced water or giving a donation—was moderately transmissible among a group of globally influential celebrities. The celebrities took a mean 2.1 days (median 1 day) to accept the challenge (the serial interval). Our finding of an R0 value greater than unity (1.43), indicating sustained spread, in a celebrities based cohort is consistent with observations reported in the press. Indeed this social viral pandemic shares a similar R0 with pandemic A/H1N1 2009 influenza, or the high end of the Middle East respiratory coronavirus since 2012 (table 3). Nine out of the 99 participants (9.1%) completed the challenge but did not nominate anyone, analogous to self isolation. We included these participants in our analyses and assumed all losses to follow-up to have declined the challenge. As with other microbial pathogens, transmissibility of the Ice Bucket Challenge may also exhibit seasonal variation,17 where it might be anticipated that the R0 value would decrease during winter.
Table 3

 R0 (major determinant of size of epidemic) of Ice Bucket Challenge and other contagions

ContagionPeriod of event/outbreakR0Mean serial interval (days)
Ice Bucket Challenge*20141.432.1†
Pandemic influenza20091.2-2.3212.821
MERS-CoV2012-140.5-1.322-249.6‡25
MeaslesRecurring14-182611.721
SmallpoxBefore 1980, eradicated4-10717.721

MERS-CoV=Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus.

R0 values >1 represent a self sustaining epidemic.

*Based on data in current study only.

†Median serial interval was 1 day.

‡Derived mean from fitted log normal distribution.

R0 (major determinant of size of epidemic) of Ice Bucket Challenge and other contagions MERS-CoV=Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. R0 values >1 represent a self sustaining epidemic. *Based on data in current study only. †Median serial interval was 1 day. ‡Derived mean from fitted log normal distribution. Possible factors accounting for the speed and extent of the Ice Bucket Challenge pandemic may include the online social media mode of transmission and the short serial interval for taking up the challenge (table 3). Despite a lower R0 than for measles or smallpox, the Ice Bucket Challenge spread quickly across the world as nominees became immediately “infectious” once nominated. A previous social network experiment found that individual uptake improved with reinforcing signals from clustered social ties.18 Therefore, specified nominations within a social network, such as celebrities, may be more successful in spreading promotional messages for public health interventions than are generic nominations. However, whether such social networks should be leveraged for health communication depends on the nature of the intervention.19 Finally, our findings suggest that the R0 of a social media campaign may increase with the support from people of a high net worth, independent of age or sex.

Limitations of this study

We had limited power to detect differences in R0 for personal factors as the inclusion criteria restricted the number of eligible index cases. Reporting of the Ice Bucket Challenge might have been socially patterned, contributing to potentially biased associations between transmissibility and net worth. The epidemiological assessment is based on a non-representative sample, and generalisability to other population groups is limited. We did not account for the likely broader influence19 of our cohort of global celebrities on the much larger population of fans and followers worldwide (average of 6.5 million Facebook likes per cohort participant), thus underestimating the overall R0, analogous to the “super spreader” concept.20 Numerous reports have suggested that the Ice Bucket Challenge has gone “viral” Until now formal analysis of its transmissibility has been limited The Ice Bucket Challenge was moderately transmissible among global celebrities and their nominees Higher net worth may be associated with greater transmissibility
  14 in total

1.  Transmission dynamics of the etiological agent of SARS in Hong Kong: impact of public health interventions.

Authors:  Steven Riley; Christophe Fraser; Christl A Donnelly; Azra C Ghani; Laith J Abu-Raddad; Anthony J Hedley; Gabriel M Leung; Lai-Ming Ho; Tai-Hing Lam; Thuan Q Thach; Patsy Chau; King-Pan Chan; Su-Vui Lo; Pak-Yin Leung; Thomas Tsang; William Ho; Koon-Hung Lee; Edith M C Lau; Neil M Ferguson; Roy M Anderson
Journal:  Science       Date:  2003-05-23       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 2.  The theory of measles elimination: implications for the design of elimination strategies.

Authors:  Nigel J Gay
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2004-05-01       Impact factor: 5.226

3.  Internet encyclopaedias go head to head.

Authors:  Jim Giles
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-12-15       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 4.  Seasonality and the dynamics of infectious diseases.

Authors:  Sonia Altizer; Andrew Dobson; Parviez Hosseini; Peter Hudson; Mercedes Pascual; Pejman Rohani
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 9.492

5.  The pluses and minuses of R0.

Authors:  M G Roberts
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2007-10-22       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 6.  Serial intervals of respiratory infectious diseases: a systematic review and analysis.

Authors:  Margaretha Annelie Vink; Martinus Christoffel Jozef Bootsma; Jacco Wallinga
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-10-07       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Celebrity endorsements of cancer screening.

Authors:  Robin J Larson; Steven Woloshin; Lisa M Schwartz; H Gilbert Welch
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-05-04       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Hospital outbreak of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus.

Authors:  Abdullah Assiri; Allison McGeer; Trish M Perl; Connie S Price; Abdullah A Al Rabeeah; Derek A T Cummings; Zaki N Alabdullatif; Maher Assad; Abdulmohsen Almulhim; Hatem Makhdoom; Hossam Madani; Rafat Alhakeem; Jaffar A Al-Tawfiq; Matthew Cotten; Simon J Watson; Paul Kellam; Alimuddin I Zumla; Ziad A Memish
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Is 27 really a dangerous age for famous musicians? Retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Martin Wolkewitz; Arthur Allignol; Nicholas Graves; Adrian G Barnett
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-12-20

10.  Interhuman transmissibility of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus: estimation of pandemic risk.

Authors:  Romulus Breban; Julien Riou; Arnaud Fontanet
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2013-07-05       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  2 in total

1.  Osteoporosis knowledge translation for young adults: new directions for prevention programs.

Authors:  Alyson Holland
Journal:  Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Are you ready for the challenge? Social Media Health Challenges for Behaviour Change.

Authors:  Inga Saboia; Ana Margarida Pisco Almeida; Pedro Sousa; Cláudia Pernencar
Journal:  Perspect Behav Sci       Date:  2020-07-28
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.