GuidelineBMC medicine2019
Guidelines for multi-model comparisons of the impact of infectious disease interventions.
Guideline in BMC medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 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
41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Do COVID-19 Infectious Disease Models Incorporate the Social Determinants of Health? A Systematic Review.Public health reviews · 2024Pooled it
- A systematic review of mechanistic models used to study avian influenza virus transmission and control.Veterinary research · 2023Pooled it
- Multi-Model Ensembles in Ecosystem Modeling: Challenges and Best Practices for Decision-Making.Global change biology · 2026Review
- Uncertainty and inconsistency of COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical intervention effects with multiple competitive statistical models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- One Health antimicrobial resistance modelling: from science to policy.Science in One Health · 2026Review
- Guidelines on reporting and assessing dynamic mathematical models of infectious diseases: a scoping review.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Coordinating collaborative infectious disease modeling projects with the hubverse.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of respiratory syncytial virus vaccination strategies for older Canadian adults: A multi-model comparison.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2025Article
- How can modeling responsibly inform decision-making in malaria?PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Population-level impact of switching to 1-dose human papillomavirus vaccination in high-income countries: examining uncertainties using mathematical modeling.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2024Article
- A competency framework on simulation modelling-supported decision-making for Master of Public Health graduates.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2024Review
- Ensemble modeling of SARS-CoV-2 immune dynamics in immunologically naïve rhesus macaques predicts that potent, early innate immune responses drive viral elimination.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- A cyclic behavioral modeling aspect to understand the effects of vaccination and treatment on epidemic transmission dynamics.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Multiple models for outbreak decision support in the face of uncertainty.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness models for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias: IPECAD modeling workshop cross-comparison challenge.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023Article
- Article
- Comparison of model predictions of typhoid conjugate vaccine public health impact and cost-effectiveness.Vaccine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite the increasing popularity of multi-model comparison studies and their ability to inform policy recommendations, clear guidance on how to conduct multi-model comparisons is not available. Herein, we present guidelines to provide a structured approach to comparisons of multiple models of interventions against infectious diseases. The primary target audience for these guidelines are researchers carrying out model comparison studies and policy-makers using model comparison studies to inform policy decisions.
methodsThe consensus process used for the development of the guidelines included a systematic review of existing model comparison studies on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of vaccination, a 2-day meeting and guideline development workshop during which mathematical modellers from different disease areas critically discussed and debated the guideline content and wording, and several rounds of comments on sequential versions of the guidelines by all authors.
resultsThe guidelines provide principles for multi-model comparisons, with specific practice statements on what modellers should do for six domains. The guidelines provide explanation and elaboration of the principles and practice statements as well as some examples to illustrate these. The principles are (1) the policy and research question - the model comparison should address a relevant, clearly defined policy question; (2) model identification and selection - the identification and selection of models for inclusion in the model comparison should be transparent and minimise selection bias; (3) harmonisation - standardisation of input data and outputs should be determined by the research question and value of the effort needed for this step; (4) exploring variability - between- and within-model variability and uncertainty should be explored; (5) presenting and pooling results - results should be presented in an appropriate way to support decision-making; and (6) interpretation - results should be interpreted to inform the policy question.
conclusionThese guidelines should help researchers plan, conduct and report model comparisons of infectious diseases and related interventions in a systematic and structured manner for the purpose of supporting health policy decisions. Adherence to these guidelines will contribute to greater consistency and objectivity in the approach and methods used in multi-model comparisons, and as such improve the quality of modelled evidence for policy.
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.