Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30040815›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2018

Real-time decision-making during emergency disease outbreaks.

William J M Probert, Chris P Jewell, Marleen Werkman, Christopher J Fonnesbeck, Yoshitaka Goto, Michael C Runge, Satoshi Sekiguchi, Katriona Shea, Matt J Keeling, Matthew J Ferrari and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Multiple models for outbreak decision support in the face of uncertainty.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. When Is Mass Prophylaxis Cost-Effective for Epidemic Control? A Comparison of Decision Approaches.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022
    Article
  17. Vote-processing rules for combining control recommendations from multiple models.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Bayesian nonparametric inference for heterogeneously mixing infectious disease models.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
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

11 authors.

William J M ProbertDepartment of Life Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3437-759X
Chris P JewellCHICAS, Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7902-2178
Marleen WerkmanDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, St Mary's Campus, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2252-9357
Christopher J FonnesbeckDepartment of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.
Yoshitaka GotoCenter for Animal Disease Control, University of Miyazaki, Miyazaki, Japan.
Michael C RungeUS Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8081-536X
Satoshi SekiguchiCenter for Animal Disease Control, University of Miyazaki, Miyazaki, Japan.
Katriona SheaCenter for Infectious Disease Dynamics, Department of Biology, Eberly College of Science, The Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Matt J KeelingDepartment of Life Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Matthew J FerrariCenter for Infectious Disease Dynamics, Department of Biology, Eberly College of Science, The Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Michael J TildesleyDepartment of Life Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.

Funding

Linking models and policy: Using active adaptive management for optimal control of disease outbreaksR01GM105247 · NIGMS · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI FERRARI, MATTHEW · 2012 to 2016
$1.3M
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/K010972/4NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM105247
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the event of a new infectious disease outbreak, mathematical and simulation models are commonly used to inform policy by evaluating which control strategies will minimize the impact of the epidemic. In the early stages of such outbreaks, substantial parameter uncertainty may limit the ability of models to provide accurate predictions, and policymakers do not have the luxury of waiting for data to alleviate this state of uncertainty. For policymakers, however, it is the selection of the optimal control intervention in the face of uncertainty, rather than accuracy of model predictions, that is the measure of success that counts. We simulate the process of real-time decision-making by fitting an epidemic model to observed, spatially-explicit, infection data at weekly intervals throughout two historical outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease, UK in 2001 and Miyazaki, Japan in 2010, and compare forward simulations of the impact of switching to an alternative control intervention at the time point in question. These are compared to policy recommendations generated in hindsight using data from the entire outbreak, thereby comparing the best we could have done at the time with the best we could have done in retrospect. Our results show that the control policy that would have been chosen using all the data is also identified from an early stage in an outbreak using only the available data, despite high variability in projections of epidemic size. Critically, we find that it is an improved understanding of the locations of infected farms, rather than improved estimates of transmission parameters, that drives improved prediction of the relative performance of control interventions. However, the ability to estimate undetected infectious premises is a function of uncertainty in the transmission parameters. Here, we demonstrate the need for both real-time model fitting and generating projections to evaluate alternative control interventions throughout an outbreak. Our results highlight the use of using models at outbreak onset to inform policy and the importance of state-dependent interventions that adapt in response to additional information throughout an outbreak.

Indexed as

Decision Making, OrganizationalHealth PolicyModels, TheoreticalAnimalsAnimals, DomesticCattleCattle DiseasesDisease OutbreaksFoot-and-Mouth DiseaseFoot-and-Mouth Disease VirusHumansJapanSheepSheep DiseasesSwineSwine DiseasesViral Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID30040815
PMCPMC6075790

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.