ArticleJournal of mathematical biology2021
Assessment of event-triggered policies of nonpharmaceutical interventions based on epidemiological indicators.
Article in Journal of mathematical biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of the first booster vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in Chile.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2026Article
- Network-based proactive contact tracing: A pre-emptive, degree-based alerting framework for privacy-preserving COVID-19 apps.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Adaptive metrics for an evolving pandemic: A dynamic approach to area-level COVID-19 risk designations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Adaptive metrics for an evolving pandemic A dynamic approach to area-level COVID-19 risk designations.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- Modeling the impact of SARS-CoV-2 variants and vaccines on the spread of COVID-19.Communications in nonlinear science & numerical simulation · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPI) such as banning public events or instituting lockdowns have been widely applied around the world to control the current COVID-19 pandemic. Typically, this type of intervention is imposed when an epidemiological indicator in a given population exceeds a certain threshold. Then, the nonpharmaceutical intervention is lifted when the levels of the indicator used have decreased sufficiently. What is the best indicator to use? In this paper, we propose a mathematical framework to try to answer this question. More specifically, the proposed framework permits to assess and compare different event-triggered controls based on epidemiological indicators. Our methodology consists of considering some outcomes that are consequences of the nonpharmaceutical interventions that a decision maker aims to make as low as possible. The peak demand for intensive care units (ICU) and the total number of days in lockdown are examples of such outcomes. If an epidemiological indicator is used to trigger the interventions, there is naturally a trade-off between the outcomes that can be seen as a curve parameterized by the trigger threshold to be used. The computation of these curves for a group of indicators then allows the selection of the best indicator the curve of which dominates the curves of the other indicators. This methodology is illustrated with indicators in the context of COVID-19 using deterministic compartmental models in discrete-time, although the framework can be adapted for a larger class of models.
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.