NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

View peer-reviewed version

Supplemental Information

Journals where included papers appeared

(A) Counts of included papers from different journals. (B) Counts of different journal types. General audience journals included Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, PLOS One, and Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences. Primarily mathematical and computational journals included American Naturalist, PLOS Computational Biology, and Journal of Theoretical Biology. Specialized journals included Molecular Biology and Evolution and Preventive Veterinary Medicine. Sub-discipline journals included Ecology, Ecological Monographs, Evolution, and Journal of Virology. All journals of the 19 included papers are included.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-2

Reason for exclusion of papers by host species

The reason for exclusion was categorized as no between-host component (gray), no data (orange), no model (blue), or no within-host component (green). All other reasons were included under other (yellow).

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-3

Types of focal host species and the modeling type

Types of focal host species used in the within-host and between-host models and the modeling type used to represent the model components. Model types were classified as deterministic (gray), individual-based (orange), statistical (blue) or stochastic (green).

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-4

Method used in data fitting at each scale

Three fitting methods were considered: Bayesian inference (gray), least squares (orange), maximum likelihood (blue). All other fitting methods were included under other (green). Different fitting methods could be used in the same papers for different scales.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-5

Supplementary Tables of Question Responses

These tables summarize the answers to each of the screening or evaluation questions.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-6

Table of screening and evaluation questions

Full screening and evaluation questions corresponding to Figure 1B in the main text.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-7

Reference information for included papers

Full bibliographic information for all papers that met the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-8

References for excluded studies

Full bibliographic information for all papers that did not meet the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review, and so were excluded.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-9

Answers to screening questions for excluded papers

Full answers to screening questions for all papers that did not meet the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-10

Answers to screening and evaluation questions for included papers

Full answers to screening and evaluation questions for all papers that met the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-11

Rationale and contribution of systematic review

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27485v1/supp-13

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Lauren M Childs conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Fadoua El Moustaid conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Zachary Gajewski conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Sarah Kadelka conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Ryan Nikin-Beers conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

John W. Smith, Jr. performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Melody Walker conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Leah R. Johnson conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The spreadsheets with the assessments of each paper are included as CSVs -- ExcludedPapers.csv and IncludedPapers.csv.

Funding

The authors received no funding for this work.


Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies
1 Citation   Views   Downloads