ArticleCanada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada2026
Economic evaluation of wastewater surveillance in Ontario, Canada, using COVID-19 as a case study.
Article in Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has stimulated the use of wastewater surveillance (WWS) in Canada. Objective: To inform continued investment, the study assessed the cost-utility of WWS, alongside conventional surveillance, compared to conventional surveillance alone, using COVID-19 in Ontario as an example. Methods: This model-based cost-utility analysis measured WWS effectiveness by increased lead time of 1-10 days for public health response using the Ontario health system perspective. The model integrated SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics, SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentration in the sewage system, and disease progression. The analysis considered year-round surveillance with an outbreak occurring once in a decade, assuming WWS benefits accrue only in the outbreak year. At the individual-level, a lifetime time horizon was used and future health outcomes (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) and cost were discounted at 1.5%. The model was informed by population-based administrative data and was calibrated to real-world Ontario surveillance data. Results: For Omicron/BA.1-like outbreaks, a WWS program with a $15 million CAD/year budget maintained over 10 years would be cost-effective at a $50,000 CAD/QALY threshold if it detects an outbreak three or more days earlier, and cost-saving if it detects an outbreak 10 or more days earlier than conventional surveillance. For a less severe outbreak with lower transmission rates, e.g., XBB-like, the WWS program would be cost-effective if at least six outbreaks occur in a decade. Conclusion: The study findings suggest that long-term investments in WWS are likely cost-effective for low-frequency but high-impact outbreaks. Maintaining WWS infrastructure will enhance Canada's emergency preparedness for emerging and re-emerging pathogens.
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.