Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Scarabel, Francesca

  • Google
  • 1
  • 11
  • 5

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2023Voluntary risk mitigation behaviour can reduce impact of SARS-CoV-2: a real-time modelling study of the January 2022 Omicron wave in England5citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Garcia, Maria Paz
1 / 1 shared
Steves, Claire J.
1 / 1 shared
Matthews, David A.
1 / 1 shared
Bowyer, Vicky
1 / 1 shared
Northstone, Kate
1 / 3 shared
Nixon, Emily
1 / 2 shared
Thomas, Amy
1 / 2 shared
Pellis, Lorenzo
1 / 2 shared
Brooks-Pollock, Ellen
1 / 1 shared
Timpson, Nicholas J.
1 / 1 shared
Danon, Leon
1 / 1 shared
Chart of publication period
2023

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Garcia, Maria Paz
  • Steves, Claire J.
  • Matthews, David A.
  • Bowyer, Vicky
  • Northstone, Kate
  • Nixon, Emily
  • Thomas, Amy
  • Pellis, Lorenzo
  • Brooks-Pollock, Ellen
  • Timpson, Nicholas J.
  • Danon, Leon
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Voluntary risk mitigation behaviour can reduce impact of SARS-CoV-2: a real-time modelling study of the January 2022 Omicron wave in England

  • Garcia, Maria Paz
  • Steves, Claire J.
  • Matthews, David A.
  • Bowyer, Vicky
  • Northstone, Kate
  • Nixon, Emily
  • Thomas, Amy
  • Scarabel, Francesca
  • Pellis, Lorenzo
  • Brooks-Pollock, Ellen
  • Timpson, Nicholas J.
  • Danon, Leon
Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Background</jats:title><jats:p>Predicting the likely size of future SARS-CoV-2 waves is necessary for public health planning. In England, voluntary “plan B” mitigation measures were introduced in December 2021 including increased home working and face coverings in shops but stopped short of restrictions on social contacts. The impact of voluntary risk mitigation behaviours on future SARS-CoV-2 burden is unknown.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>We developed a rapid online survey of risk mitigation behaviours ahead of the winter 2021 festive period and deployed in two longitudinal cohort studies in the UK (Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) and TwinsUK/COVID Symptom Study (CSS) Biobank) in December 2021. Using an individual-based, probabilistic model of COVID-19 transmission between social contacts with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant parameters and realistic vaccine coverage in England, we predicted the potential impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron wave in England in terms of the effective reproduction number and cumulative infections, hospital admissions and deaths. Using survey results, we estimated in real-time the impact of voluntary risk mitigation behaviours on the Omicron wave in England, if implemented for the entire epidemic wave.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>Over 95% of survey respondents (N<jats:sub>ALSPAC</jats:sub> = 2686 and N<jats:sub>Twins</jats:sub> = 6155) reported some risk mitigation behaviours, with vaccination and using home testing kits reported most frequently. Less than half of those respondents reported that their behaviour was due to “plan B”. We estimate that without risk mitigation behaviours, the Omicron variant is consistent with an effective reproduction number between 2.5 and 3.5. Due to the reduced vaccine effectiveness against infection with the Omicron variant, our modelled estimates suggest that between 55% and 60% of the English population could be infected during the current wave, translating into between 12,000 and 46,000 cumulative deaths, depending on assumptions about severity and vaccine effectiveness. The actual number of deaths was 15,208 (26 November 2021–1 March 2022). We estimate that voluntary risk reduction measures could reduce the effective reproduction number to between 1.8 and 2.2 and reduce the cumulative number of deaths by up to 24%.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>Predicting future infection burden is affected by uncertainty in disease severity and vaccine effectiveness estimates. In addition to biological uncertainty, we show that voluntary measures substantially reduce the projected impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant but that voluntary measures alone would be unlikely to completely control transmission.</jats:p></jats:sec>

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • laser emission spectroscopy
  • size-exclusion chromatography