ArticleDialogues in health2024
Open-sourced modeling and simulating tools for decision-makers during an emerging pandemic or epidemic - Systematic evaluation of utility and usability: A scoping review update.
Article in Dialogues in health, 2024. 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: The COVID-19 pandemic had devastating effects on health systems globally. Emerging infectious diseases and pandemics will persist as a global health threat and preparedness for an evidence based response becomes challenging for decision makers. Epidemiological modeling can and has supported decision-making throughout pandemics. This study provides an update of the review "Publicly available software tools for decision-makers during an emergent epidemic-Systematic evaluation of utility and usability" Research question: What epidemiological modeling tools for decision-makers are open-sourced available for the usage in emerging epidemics or pandemics and how useful and user-friendly are these tools? Methods: A scoping review was conducted. We identified relevant studies through a search of peer-reviewed (Medline Ovid, Embase Ovid, PubMed, Cochrane) and gray literature databases, search engines such as Google, searches through stakeholder websites as well as expert consultations. Results: Of the 66 identified epidemiological modeling tools, 29 were included and qualitatively assessed using five-point-rating scales. The tools showed a good baseline of user-friendliness with variations in assessed components, features and utility. Room for improvement was found, specifically the capability to incorporate external data sources, detailed population descriptions, and geographic resolution. Discussion: Development efforts should prioritize clear communication of uncertainties and expert review processes. Trainings for specific tools should be considered. Conclusion: Tool usage can enhance decision-making when adapted to the user's needs and purpose. They should be consulted critically rather than followed blindly.
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.