ArticleFrontiers in public health2023
A risk-based decision framework for policy analysis of societal pandemic effects.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In this article, we summarize our findings from an EU-supported project for policy analyses applied to pandemics such as Covid-19 (with the potential to be applied as well to other, similar hazards) while considering various mitigation levels and consequence sets under several criteria. Methods: It is based on our former development for handling imprecise information in risk trees and multi-criteria hierarchies using intervals and qualitative estimates. We shortly present the theoretical background and demonstrate how it can be used for systematic policy analyses. In our model, we use decision trees and multi-criteria hierarchies extended by belief distributions for weights, probabilities and values as well as combination rules to aggregate the background information in an extended expected value model, taking into criteria weights as well as probabilities and outcome values. We used the computer-supported tool DecideIT for the aggregate decision analysis under uncertainty. Results: The framework has been applied in three countries: Botswana, Romania and Jordan, and extended for scenario-building during the third wave of the pandemic in Sweden, proving its feasibility in real-time policy-making for pandemic mitigation measures. Discussion: This work resulted in a more fine-grained model for policy decision that is much more aligned to the societal needs in the future, either if the Covid-19 pandemic prevails or for the next pandemic or other society-wide hazardous emergencies.
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.