Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35283547›Full record

ArticleAnnals of operations research2022

Multi-attribute COVID-19 policy evaluation under deep uncertainty.

Jack Mitcham, Jeffrey Keisler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of operations research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Jack MitchamCollege of Management, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7816-269X
Jeffrey KeislerCollege of Management, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mitigating the impacts of COVID-19 comes with the evaluation of tradeoffs. However, the exact magnitude of the tradeoffs being made cannot be known ahead of time. There are three major concerns to balance: life, liberty, and economy. Here, we create a multi-attribute utility function including those three attributes and provide reasonable bounds on the weights of each. No one set of weights on the utility function can be considered "correct." Furthermore, the outcomes of each mitigation strategy are deeply uncertain. Not only do we need to take into account the characteristics of the disease, but we also need to take into account the efficacy of the mitigation strategies and how each outcome would be evaluated. To handle this, we use Robust Decision Making methods to simulate plausible outcomes for various strategies and evaluate those outcomes using different weights on the multi-attribute utility function. The simulation is done with a compartmental epidemiological model combined with a simple economic model and a model of liberty costs. Rather than trying to optimize likely outcomes for a particular version of the utility function, we find which strategies are robust across a wide range of plausible scenarios even when there is disagreement about how to weigh the competing values of life, liberty, and economy.

Indexed as

COVID-19Minimax regretMulti-attribute utility theoryRobust decision-makingTradeoff analysisValue of life

Identifiers

PMID35283547
PMCPMC8898502

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.