ArticlePLOS digital health2026
Assessing the informative value of macroeconomic indicators for public health forecasting.
Article in PLOS digital health, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Macroeconomic conditions influence the environments in which health systems operate, yet their value as leading signals of health-system capacity has not been systematically evaluated. In this study, we examined whether certain macroeconomic indicators contained predictive information for several capacity-related public health targets in the United States: employment in the health and social assistance workforce, new business applications in the sector, and health care construction spending. Using seasonally adjusted monthly time-series data collected from government sources, we evaluated multiple forecasting approaches-including neural network models with different optimization strategies, generalized additive models, random forests, and time series models with exogenous macroeconomic indicators-under different model fitting designs. Across the evaluation settings, we found that macroeconomic indicators are associated with improved predictive performance for some public health targets-particularly workforce measures-while other targets exhibit weaker or less stable predictability. Models emphasizing stability and implicit regularization tend to perform more reliably during periods of economic volatility. These findings suggest that macroeconomic indicators may serve as useful upstream signals for digital public health monitoring, while underscoring the need for careful model selection and validation when translating economic trends into health-system forecasting tools.
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.