ArticleFrontiers in public health2021
Analysis of the Tradeoff Between Health and Economic Impacts of the Covid-19 Epidemic.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- COVID-19 vaccine information disorder in Chile: a quantitative analysis of fact-checked articles.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the world's major economies: based on a multi-country and multi-sector CGE model.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- COVID-19 Pandemic: Did Strict Mobility Restrictions Save Lives and Healthcare Costs in Maharashtra, India?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Epidemic Management via Imperfect Testing: A Multi-criterial Perspective.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2023Article
- Optimizing two-dose vaccine resource allocation to combat a pandemic in the context of limited supply: The case of COVID-19.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- The micro-economic effects of COVID-19 containment measures: A simple model and evidence from China.PloS one · 2023Article
- Biophysical and Biochemical Characterization of the Receptor Binding Domain of SARS-CoV-2 Variants.The protein journal · 2022Article
- Variations of COVID-19 mortality are affected by economic disparities across countries.The Science of the total environment · 2022Article
- Multi-dimensional impacts of Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on Sustainable Development Goal achievement.Globalization and health · 2022Article
- The Configuration of Incentives in Small and Medium-Sized Content Platform Enterprises Under the Normalization of COVID-19.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Various measures have been taken in different countries to mitigate the Covid-19 epidemic. But, throughout the world, many citizens don't understand well how these measures are taken and even question the decisions taken by their government. Should the measures be more (or less) restrictive? Are they taken for a too long (or too short) period of time? To provide some quantitative elements of response to these questions, we consider the well-known SEIR model for the Covid-19 epidemic propagation and propose a pragmatic model of the government decision-making operation. Although simple and obviously improvable, the proposed model allows us to study the tradeoff between health and economic aspects in a pragmatic and insightful way. Assuming a given number of phases for the epidemic (namely, 4 in this paper) and a desired tradeoff between health and economic aspects, it is then possible to determine the optimal duration of each phase and the optimal severity level (i.e., the target transmission rate) for each of them. The numerical analysis is performed for the case of France but the adopted approach can be applied to any country. One of the takeaway messages of this analysis is that being able to implement the optimal 4-phase epidemic management strategy in France would have led to 1.05 million of infected people and a GDP loss of 231 billions € instead of 6.88 millions of infected and a loss of 241 billions €. This indicates that, seen from the proposed model perspective, the effectively implemented epidemic management strategy is good economically, whereas substantial improvements might have been obtained in terms of health impact. Our analysis indicates that the lockdown/severe phase should have been more severe but shorter, and the adjustment phase occurred earlier. Due to the natural tendency of people to deviate from the official rules, updating measures every month over the whole epidemic episode seems to be more appropriate.
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.