Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28622344›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Protecting an island nation from extreme pandemic threats: Proof-of-concept around border closure as an intervention.

Matt Boyd, Michael G Baker, Osman D Mansoor, Giorgi Kvizhinadze, Nick Wilson

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The Evolving Policy Debate on Border Closure in Korea.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Public Health Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: The Role of the Morrison Government.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  6. Entrepreneurship during a pandemic.European journal of law and economics · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Matt BoydAdapt Research Ltd, Wellington, New Zealand.
Michael G BakerDepartment of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
Osman D Mansoor39 Mortimer Tce, Wellington, New Zealand.
Giorgi KvizhinadzeDepartment of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
Nick WilsonDepartment of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCountries are well advised to prepare for future pandemic risks (e.g., pandemic influenza, novel emerging agents or synthetic bioweapons). These preparations do not typically include planning for complete border closure. Even though border closure may not be instituted in time, and can fail, there might still plausible chances of success for well organized island nations.

objectiveTo estimate costs and benefits of complete border closure in response to new pandemic threats, at an initial proof-of-concept level. New Zealand was used as a case-study for an island country.

methodsAn Excel spreadsheet model was developed to estimate costs and benefits. Case-study specific epidemiological data was sourced from past influenza pandemics. Country-specific healthcare cost data, valuation of life, and lost tourism revenue were imputed (with lost trade also in scenario analyses).

resultsFor a new pandemic equivalent to the 1918 influenza pandemic (albeit with half the mortality rate, "Scenario A"), it was estimated that successful border closure for 26 weeks provided a net societal benefit (e.g., of NZ$11.0 billion, USD$7.3 billion). Even in the face of a complete end to trade, a net benefit was estimated for scenarios where the mortality rate was high (e.g., at 10 times the mortality impact of "Scenario A", or 2.75% of the country's population dying) giving a net benefit of NZ$54 billion (USD$36 billion). But for some other pandemic scenarios where trade ceased, border closure resulted in a net negative societal value (e.g., for "Scenario A" times three for 26 weeks of border closure-but not for only 12 weeks of closure when it would still be beneficial).

conclusionsThis "proof-of-concept" work indicates that more detailed cost-benefit analysis of border closure in very severe pandemic situations for some island nations is probably warranted, as this course of action might sometimes be worthwhile from a societal perspective.

Indexed as

Models, EconomicCosts and Cost AnalysisFemaleHistory, 20th CenturyHumansInfluenza, HumanInfluenza Pandemic, 1918-1919MaleNew Zealand

Identifiers

PMID28622344
PMCPMC5473559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.