Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35721853›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022

Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Techniques for Informing Select Agent Designation and Decision Making.

Segaran P Pillai, Julia A Fruetel, Kevin Anderson, Rebecca Levinson, Patricia Hernandez, Brandon Heimer, Stephen A Morse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Future Issues in Global Health: Challenges and Conundrums.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  3. Trimming tiers - Motivations and means for de-risking select agents.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors.

Segaran P PillaiOffice of the Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Silver Spring, MD, United States.
Julia A FruetelSandia National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Livermore, CA, United States.
Kevin AndersonScience and Technology Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC, United States.
Rebecca LevinsonSandia National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Livermore, CA, United States.
Patricia HernandezSandia National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Livermore, CA, United States.
Brandon HeimerSandia National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Livermore, CA, United States.
Stephen A MorseIHRC, Inc., Atlanta, GA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Select Agent Program establishes a list of biological agents and toxins that potentially threaten public health and safety, the procedures governing the possession, utilization, and transfer of those agents, and training requirements for entities working with them. Every 2 years the Program reviews the select agent list, utilizing subject matter expert (SME) assessments to rank the agents. In this study, we explore the applicability of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) techniques and logic tree analysis to support the CDC Select Agent Program biennial review process, applying the approach broadly to include non-select agents to evaluate its generality. We conducted a literature search for over 70 pathogens against 15 criteria for assessing public health and bioterrorism risk and documented the findings for archiving. The most prominent data gaps were found for aerosol stability and human infectious dose by inhalation and ingestion routes. Technical review of published data and associated scoring recommendations by pathogen-specific SMEs was found to be critical for accuracy, particularly for pathogens with very few known cases, or where proxy data (e.g., from animal models or similar organisms) were used to address data gaps. Analysis of results obtained from a two-dimensional plot of weighted scores for difficulty of attack (i.e., exposure and production criteria) vs. consequences of an attack (i.e., consequence and mitigation criteria) provided greater fidelity for understanding agent placement compared to a 1-to-n ranking and was used to define a region in the upper right-hand quadrant for identifying pathogens for consideration as select agents. A sensitivity analysis varied the numerical weights attributed to various properties of the pathogens to identify potential quantitative (x and y) thresholds for classifying select agents. The results indicate while there is some clustering of agent scores to suggest thresholds, there are still pathogens that score close to any threshold, suggesting that thresholding "by eye" may not be sufficient. The sensitivity analysis indicates quantitative thresholds are plausible, and there is good agreement of the analytical results with select agent designations. A second analytical approach that applied the data using a logic tree format to rule out pathogens for consideration as select agents arrived at similar conclusions.

Indexed as

biosecuritylogic tree analysismulti-criteriarisk assesmentselect agents and toxins

Identifiers

PMID35721853
PMCPMC9204104

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.