ArticleScientific reports2024
The value of environmental surveillance for pandemic response.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of amplicon-based nanopore sequencing for foot-and-mouth disease viruses in clinical and environmental samples.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Operationalizing metagenomic data from environmental surveillance for one health decision-making in live animal markets: Findings from a multisectoral workshop in Cambodia.Dialogues in health · 2026Article
- A framework for evaluating implementation, impact, and cost-effectiveness of wastewater and environmental surveillance.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Optimal sampling frequency and site selection for wastewater and environmental surveillance of infectious pathogens: A value of information assessment.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Environmental sampling surveillance (ESS) technologies, such as wastewater genomic surveillance and air sensors, have been increasingly adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide valuable information for public health response. However, ESS coverage is not universal, and public health decision-makers need support to choose whether and how to expand and sustain ESS efforts. This paper introduces a model and approach to quantify the value of ESS systems that provide leading epidemiological indicators for pandemic response. Using the COVID-19 pandemic as a base-case scenario, we quantify the value of ESS systems in the first year of a new pandemic and demonstrate how the value of ESS systems depends on biological and societal parameters. Under baseline assumptions, an ESS system that provides a 5-day early warning relative to syndromic surveillance could reduce deaths from 149 (95% prediction interval: 136-169) to 134 (124-144) per 100,000 population during the first year of a new COVID-19-like pandemic, resulting in a net monetary benefit of $1,450 ($609-$2,740) per person. The system's value is higher for more transmissible and deadly pathogens but hinges on the effectiveness of public health interventions. Our findings also suggest that ESS systems would provide net-positive benefits even if they were permanently maintained and pathogens like SARS-Cov-2 emerged once every century or less frequently. Our results can be used to prioritize pathogens for ESS, decide whether and how to expand systems to currently uncovered populations, and determine how to scale surveillance systems' coverage over time.
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.