ArticlePloS one2015
Cost-Effective Control of Infectious Disease Outbreaks Accounting for Societal Reaction.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Coverage and determinants of childhood immunization in Somalia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Pooled it
- Immunization coverage and its determinant factors among children aged 12-23 months in Ethiopia: a systematic review, and Meta- analysis of cross-sectional studies.BMC pediatrics · 2020Pooled it
- Factors influencing length of stay and costs in inpatient cases of human brucellosis as the primary diagnosis over a decade in Beijing, China.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Factors affecting the use of biosecurity measures for the protection of ruminant livestock and farm workers against infectious diseases in central South Africa.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2022Article
- Improving immunization capacity in Ethiopia through continuous quality improvement interventions: a prospective quasi-experimental study.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2018Article
- Cross-transmission in the Dental Office: Does This Make You Ill?Current oral health reports · 2018Review
- A large-scale behavior change intervention to prevent Nipah transmission in Bangladesh: components and costs.BMC research notes · 2017Article
- Perception of the Risks of Ebola, Enterovirus-E68 and Influenza Among Emergency Department Patients.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies of cost-effective disease prevention have typically focused on the tradeoff between the cost of disease transmission and the cost of applying control measures. We present a novel approach that also accounts for the cost of social disruptions resulting from the spread of disease. These disruptions, which we call social response, can include heightened anxiety, strain on healthcare infrastructure, economic losses, or violence. METHODOLOGY: The spread of disease and social response are simulated under several different intervention strategies. The modeled social response depends upon the perceived risk of the disease, the extent of disease spread, and the media involvement. Using Monte Carlo simulation, we estimate the total number of infections and total social response for each strategy. We then identify the strategy that minimizes the expected total cost of the disease, which includes the cost of the disease itself, the cost of control measures, and the cost of social response.
conclusionsThe model-based simulations suggest that the least-cost disease control strategy depends upon the perceived risk of the disease, as well as media intervention. The most cost-effective solution for diseases with low perceived risk was to implement moderate control measures. For diseases with higher perceived severity, such as SARS or Ebola, the most cost-effective strategy shifted toward intervening earlier in the outbreak, with greater resources. When intervention elicited increased media involvement, it remained important to control high severity diseases quickly. For moderate severity diseases, however, it became most cost-effective to implement no intervention and allow the disease to run its course. Our simulation results imply that, when diseases are perceived as severe, the costs of social response have a significant influence on selecting the most cost-effective strategy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.