Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35591754›Full record

ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2022

When Is Mass Prophylaxis Cost-Effective for Epidemic Control? A Comparison of Decision Approaches.

Giovanni S P Malloy, Margaret L Brandeau

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 47% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Emulator-Based Bayesian Calibration of the CISNET Colorectal Cancer Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024
    Article
  3. Emulator-based Bayesian calibration of the CISNET colorectal cancer models.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Giovanni S P MalloyDepartment of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0806-5525
Margaret L BrandeauDepartment of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Stanford University · US

Funding

Making Better Decisions: Policy Modeling for AIDS and Drug AbuseR37DA015612 · NIDA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI DOUGLAS K OWENS · 2019 to 2026
$6.3M
NIDA NIH HHS R37 DA015612
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor certain communicable disease outbreaks, mass prophylaxis of uninfected individuals can curtail new infections. When an outbreak emerges, decision makers could benefit from methods to quickly determine whether mass prophylaxis is cost-effective. We consider 2 approaches: a simple decision model and machine learning meta-models. The motivating example is plague in Madagascar.

methodsWe use a susceptible-exposed-infectious-removed (SEIR) epidemic model to derive a decision rule based on the fraction of the population infected, effective reproduction ratio, infection fatality rate, quality-adjusted life-year loss associated with death, prophylaxis effectiveness and cost, time horizon, and willingness-to-pay threshold. We also develop machine learning meta-models of a detailed model of plague in Madagascar using logistic regression, random forest, and neural network models. In numerical experiments, we compare results using the decision rule and the meta-models to results obtained using the simulation model. We vary the initial fraction of the population infected, the effective reproduction ratio, the intervention start date and duration, and the cost of prophylaxis. LIMITATIONS: We assume homogeneous mixing and no negative side effects due to antibiotic prophylaxis.

resultsThe simple decision rule matched the SEIR model outcome in 85.4% of scenarios. Using data for a 2017 plague outbreak in Madagascar, the decision rule correctly indicated that mass prophylaxis was not cost-effective. The meta-models were significantly more accurate, with an accuracy of 92.8% for logistic regression, 95.8% for the neural network model, and 96.9% for the random forest model.

conclusionsA simple decision rule using minimal information about an outbreak can accurately evaluate the cost-effectiveness of mass prophylaxis for outbreak mitigation. Meta-models of a complex disease simulation can achieve higher accuracy but with greater computational and data requirements and less interpretability. HIGHLIGHTS: We use a susceptible-exposed-infectious-removed model and net monetary benefit to derive a simple decision rule to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of mass prophylaxis.We use the example of plague in Madagascar to compare the performance of the analytically derived decision rule to that of machine learning meta-models trained on a stochastic dynamic transmission model.We assess the accuracy of each approach for different combinations of disease dynamics and intervention scenarios.The machine learning meta-models are more accurate predictors of mass prophylaxis cost-effectiveness. However, the simple decision rule is also accurate and may be a preferred substitute in low-resource settings.

Indexed as

EpidemicsPlagueCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansQuality-Adjusted Life Yearsdecision toolepidemicmachine learningmeta-modelplagueprophylaxis

Identifiers

PMID35591754
PMCPMC9588490
OpenAlexW4281257776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.