ArticleInterface focus2025
Including frameworks of public health ethics in computational modelling of infectious disease interventions.
Article in Interface focus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring epidemic control policies using nonlinear programming and mathematical models.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Including frameworks of public health ethics in computational modelling of infectious disease interventions.Interface focus · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Decisions on public health interventions to control infectious diseases are often informed by computational models. Interpreting the predicted outcomes of a public health decision requires not only high-quality modelling but also an ethical framework for assessing the benefits and harms associated with different options. The design and specification of ethical frameworks matured independently of computational modelling, so many values recognized as important for ethical decision-making are missing from computational models. We demonstrate a proof-of-concept approach to incorporate multiple public health values into the evaluation of a simple computational model for vaccination against a pathogen such as SARS-CoV-2. By examining a bounded space of alternative prioritizations of three values relevant to public health ethics (aggregate clinical burden, equity in clinical burden, equity in adverse effects from vaccination), we identify value trade-offs, where the outcomes of optimal strategies differ depending on the ethical framework. This work demonstrates an approach to incorporating diverse values into decision criteria used to evaluate outcomes of models of infectious disease interventions.
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.