Erratum for the Research Article “Generalized contact matrices allow integrating socioeconomic variables into epidemic models” by A. Manna <i>et al.</i>

The original version of the Research Article, “Generalized contact matrices allow integrating socioeconomic variables into epidemic models” by A. Manna et al., contained discrepancies between the text and the insets of Figs. 2, 3, and 4 in the main text and figs. S2, S4, S5, and S6 in the Supplementary Materials. The main text stated the insets compared the three outcomes for a fixed value of R0 (R0 = 2.7). However, the authors had fixed the value of the transmissibility of the disease instead of R0. Although the insets were correct, they did not correspond to what was written in the text. Edits have been made to the main text in the Results section to better reflect the relative position of peaks in the corrected figures. Additionally, due to an error in the pre-processing workflow, an earlier version of the preprocessed data was mistakenly used in Fig. 4 (A to C). The x-axis range in Figs. 2, 3, and 4 in the main text and figs. S2, S4, S5, and S6 in the Supplementary Materials have been updated to make the plots more visible.

Publication Details

Journal
Science Advances
Published
2026-04-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aeh6449
Primary Topic
COVID-19 epidemiological studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Erratum for the Research Article “Generalized contact matrices allow integrating socioeconomic variables into epidemic models” by A. Manna et al.

Science Advances
COVID-19 epidemiological studies
article

Erratum for the Research Article “Generalized contact matrices allow integrating socioeconomic variables into epidemic models” by A. Manna et al.

article en

Abstract

The original version of the Research Article, “Generalized contact matrices allow integrating socioeconomic variables into epidemic models” by A. Manna et al., contained discrepancies between the text and the insets of Figs. 2, 3, and 4 in the main text and figs. S2, S4, S5, and S6 in the Supplementary Materials. The main text stated the insets compared the three outcomes for a fixed value of R0 (R0 = 2.7). However, the authors had fixed the value of the transmissibility of the disease instead of R0. Although the insets were correct, they did not correspond to what was written in the text. Edits have been made to the main text in the Results section to better reflect the relative position of peaks in the corrected figures. Additionally, due to an error in the pre-processing workflow, an earlier version of the preprocessed data was mistakenly used in Fig. 4 (A to C). The x-axis range in Figs. 2, 3, and 4 in the main text and figs. S2, S4, S5, and S6 in the Supplementary Materials have been updated to make the plots more visible.

Science AdvancesVol. 12(16)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
COVID-19 epidemiological studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.