Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36530670›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

The role of models as a decision-making support tool rather than a guiding light in managing the COVID-19 pandemic.

Adi Niv-Yagoda, Royi Barnea, Efrat Rubinshtein Zilberman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Adi Niv-YagodaSchool of Health Systems Management, Netanya Academic College, Netanya, Israel.
Royi BarneaSchool of Health Systems Management, Netanya Academic College, Netanya, Israel.
Efrat Rubinshtein ZilbermanHillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reference scenarios based on mathematical models are used by public health experts to study infectious diseases. To gain insight into modeling assumptions, we analyzed the three major models that served as the basis for policy making in Israel during the COVID-19 pandemic and compared them to independently collected data. The number of confirmed patients, the number of patients in critical condition and the number of COVID-19 deaths predicted by the models were compared to actual data collected and published in the Israeli Ministry of Health's dashboard. Our analysis showed that the models succeeded in predicting the number of COVID-19 cases but failed to deliver an appropriate prediction of the number of critically ill and deceased persons. Inherent uncertainty and a multiplicity of assumptions that were not based on reliable information have led to significant variability among models, and between the models and real-world data. Although models improve policy leaders' ability to act rationally despite great uncertainty, there is an inherent difficulty in relying on mathematical models as reliable tools for predicting and formulating a strategy for dealing with the spread of an unknown disease.

Indexed as

COVID-19Critical IllnessHumansIsraelPandemicsPublic HealthCOVID-19evidence based decision-makinghealth policymodelspublic health

Identifiers

PMID36530670
PMCPMC9751413

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.