ArticlePloS one2025
Balancing health and socioeconomic impacts: A uniform framework for evaluating non-pharmaceutical interventions.
Article in PloS one, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper introduces a uniform evaluation framework for assessing the effectiveness of past non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) in managing infectious diseases, taking into account the cultural and social differences between countries. The framework enables quantifying and finding the optimal balance of both the health and socioeconomic impacts of NPIs. The aim is to assist policymakers in understanding which NPIs lead to the optimal balance by highlighting unnecessary costs - the costs that could be avoided while maintaining the same infection rates. To assess the extent of unnecessary socioeconomic consequences experienced by a country during a past epidemic of infectious diseases, we use the following approach. First, we develop a model that predicts the number of infections from NPIs in a country. Second, we estimate the socioeconomic costs (SEC) of the NPIs universally for countries included in the study. Third, we develop a model that prescribes the NPI plans with the optimal trade-off between the number of infections and the SEC. Fourth, we create a model that specifically adjusts each country's SEC. Finally, we provide additional analysis to increase comprehension of the effects of NPIs. Demonstrated through an analysis of COVID-19 pandemic responses in 17 countries, the study offers a systematic presentation of the framework and a concrete examination of the integrated effects of NPIs. It provides insights into interventions' direct and indirect consequences, offering guidance for future epidemic responses. The framework enables a systematic understanding of the effects of the NPIs applied, acknowledging the national diversity in health measure acceptance and implementation. This allows for fair analysis across countries, identifying and displaying the economic, social, and health-related costs of suboptimal NPI strategies, i.e., unnecessary costs. The framework is applicable for any infectious disease, NPIs, or country, assuming the medical interventions are similar, e.g., timing and amount of vaccination.
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.