ArticleScientific reports2025
An agent-based model of COVID- 19 in the food industry for assessing public health and economic impacts of infection control strategies.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The COVID- 19 pandemic exposed challenges of balancing public health and economic goals of infection control in essential industries like food production. To enhance decision-making during future outbreaks, we developed a customizable agent-based model (FInd CoV Control) that predicts and counterfactually compares COVID- 19 transmission in a food production operation under various interventions. The model tracks the number of infections as well as economic outcomes (e.g., number of unavailable workers, direct expenses, production losses). The results revealed strong tradeoffs between public health and economic impacts of interventions. Temperature screening and virus testing protect public health but have substantial economic downsides. Vaccination, while inexpensive, is too slow as a reactive strategy. Intensive physical distancing and biosafety interventions prove cost-effective. The variability and bimodality in predicted impacts of counterfactual interventions, explained by the chance effects and early stochastic infection die-off, caution against relying on single-operation real-world data for decision-making. These findings underscore the need for a proactive infrastructure capable of rapidly developing integrated infection-economic mechanistic models for the essential industries to guide infection control, policy-making, and socially acceptable decisions.
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.