Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33324694›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2020

Socially vs. Privately Optimal Control of Livestock Diseases: A Case for Integration of Epidemiology and Economics.

Ângelo J Mendes, Daniel T Haydon, Emma McIntosh, Nick Hanley, Jo E B Halliday

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ângelo J MendesCollege of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Daniel T HaydonCollege of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Emma McIntoshCollege of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Nick HanleyCollege of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Jo E B HallidayCollege of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
University of Glasgow · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper aims to illustrate the interdependencies between key epidemiological and economic factors that influence the control of many livestock infectious diseases. The factors considered here are (i) farmer heterogeneity (i.e., differences in how farmers respond to a perceived disease risk), (ii) off-farm effects of farmers' actions to control a disease (i.e., costs and benefits borne by agents that are external to the farm), and (iii) misalignment between privately and socially optimal control efforts (i.e., privately optimal behavior not conducive to a socially optimal outcome). Endemic chronic diseases cause a wide range of adverse social and economic impacts, particularly in low-income countries. The actions taken by farmers to control livestock diseases minimize some of these impacts, and heterogeneity in those actions leads to variation in prevalence at the farm level. While some farmers respond to perceived disease risks, others free-ride on the actions of these individuals, thereby compromising the potential benefits of collective, coordinated behavior. When evaluating a plausible range of disease cost to price of control ratios and assuming that farmers choose their privately optimal control effort, we demonstrate that achievement of a socially optimal disease control target is unlikely, occurring in <25% of all price-cost combinations. To achieve a socially optimal disease control outcome (reliant on farmers' voluntary actions), control policies must consider farmer heterogeneity, off-farm effects, and the predicted uptake of control measures under the assumption of optimized behavior.

Indexed as

disease controleconomicsepidemiologyinfectionlivestockmodel

Identifiers

PMID33324694
PMCPMC7723844
OpenAlexW3108195838

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.