Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31042708›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2019

Unbiased assessment of disease surveillance utilities: A prospect theory application.

Arthur E Attema, Lisheng He, Alasdair J C Cook, Victor J Del Rio Vilas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Arthur E AttemaErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3607-6579
Lisheng HeDepartment of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.
Alasdair J C CookSchool of Veterinary Medicine, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom.
Victor J Del Rio VilasSchool of Veterinary Medicine, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe contribute a new methodological approach to the ongoing efforts towards evaluating public health surveillance. Specifically, we apply a descriptive framework, grounded in prospect theory (PT), for the evaluation of decisions on disease surveillance deployment. We focus on two attributes of any surveillance system: timeliness, and false positive rate (FPR).

methodsIn a sample of 69 health professionals from a number of health related networks polled online, we elicited PT preferences, specifically respondents' attitudes towards gains, losses and probabilities (i.e., if they overweight or underweight extreme probabilities) by means of a series of lotteries for either timeliness or FPR. Moreover, we estimated willingness to pay (WTP) for improvements in the two surveillance attributes. For contextualization, we apply our framework to rabies surveillance.

resultsOur data reveal considerable probability weighting, both for gains and losses. In other words, respondents underestimate their chances of getting a good outcome in uncertain situations, and they overestimate their chances of bad outcomes. Moreover, there is convex utility for losses and loss aversion, that is, losses loom larger than gains of the same absolute magnitude to the respondents. We find no differences between the estimated parameters for timeliness and FPR. The median WTP is $7,250 per day gained in detection time and $30 per 1/10,000 reduction in FPR.

conclusionOur results indicate that the biases described by PT are present among public health professionals, which highlights the need to incorporate a PT framework when eliciting their preferences for surveillance systems.

Indexed as

Epidemiologic MethodsSentinel SurveillanceDiseaseHumansPopulation SurveillancePublic Health

Identifiers

PMID31042708
PMCPMC6513105

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.