Average rating: | Rated 3.5 of 5. |
Level of importance: | Rated 4 of 5. |
Level of validity: | Rated 4 of 5. |
Level of completeness: | Rated 3 of 5. |
Level of comprehensibility: | Rated 3 of 5. |
Competing interests: | None |
The paper is well-written and presents a clear methodology for testing the hypothesis. The authors provide a detailed description of the data used in the analysis and the approach taken to analyze the data. However, the paper only provides evidence of contagion in restricted sub-groups of the network and not in the whole network. The authors acknowledge this limitation and suggest that future research could explore the reasons for the absence of contagion in the whole network. The methodology presented in the paper could be useful for future research in this area. The paper could benefit from further analysis to explore the reasons for the absence of contagion in the whole network.