ArticlePloS one2021
Reopening California: Seeking robust, non-dominated COVID-19 exit strategies.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive models for health outcomes due to SARS-CoV-2, including the effect of vaccination: a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Incorporating social determinants of health into agent-based models of HIV transmission: methodological challenges and future directions.Frontiers in epidemiology · 2025Review
- 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
- Optimal non-pharmaceutical pandemic response strategies depend critically on time horizons and costs.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Phase-wise evaluation and optimization of non-pharmaceutical interventions to contain the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Reopening Under Uncertainty: Stress-Testing California's COVID-19 Exit Strategy.Rand health quarterly · 2022Article
- Too Good to Be True? Evaluation of Colonoscopy Sensitivity Assumptions Used in Policy Models.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic required significant public health interventions from local governments. Although nonpharmaceutical interventions often were implemented as decision rules, few studies evaluated the robustness of those reopening plans under a wide range of uncertainties. This paper uses the Robust Decision Making approach to stress-test 78 alternative reopening strategies, using California as an example. This study uniquely considers a wide range of uncertainties and demonstrates that seemingly sensible reopening plans can lead to both unnecessary COVID-19 deaths and days of interventions. We find that plans using fixed COVID-19 case thresholds might be less effective than strategies with time-varying reopening thresholds. While we use California as an example, our results are particularly relevant for jurisdictions where vaccination roll-out has been slower. The approach used in this paper could also prove useful for other public health policy problems in which policymakers need to make robust decisions in the face of deep uncertainty.
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.