Selected article for: "cost benefit analysis and decision making"

Author: Zawadzki, Roy S.; Gong, Cynthia L.; Cho, Sang K.; Schnitzer, Jan E.; Zawadzki, Nadine K.; Hay, Joel W.; Drabo, Emmanuel F.
Title: Where Do We Go From Here?: A Framework for Using Susceptible-Infectious-Recovered Models for Policy Making in Emerging Infectious Diseases
  • Cord-id: vnz2h98g
  • Document date: 2021_5_10
  • ID: vnz2h98g
    Snippet: OBJECTIVES: Throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, susceptible-infectious-recovered (SIR) modeling has been the preeminent modeling method to inform policy making worldwide. Nevertheless, the usefulness of such models has been subject to controversy. An evolution in the epidemiological modeling field is urgently needed, beginning with an agreed-upon set of modeling standards for policy recommendations. The objective of this article is to propose a set of modeling standards to support
    Document: OBJECTIVES: Throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, susceptible-infectious-recovered (SIR) modeling has been the preeminent modeling method to inform policy making worldwide. Nevertheless, the usefulness of such models has been subject to controversy. An evolution in the epidemiological modeling field is urgently needed, beginning with an agreed-upon set of modeling standards for policy recommendations. The objective of this article is to propose a set of modeling standards to support policy decision making. METHODS: We identify and describe 5 broad standards: transparency, heterogeneity, calibration and validation, cost-benefit analysis, and model obsolescence and recalibration. We give methodological recommendations and provide examples in the literature that employ these standards well. We also develop and demonstrate a modeling practices checklist using existing coronavirus disease 2019 literature that can be employed by readers, authors, and reviewers to evaluate and compare policy modeling literature along our formulated standards. RESULTS: We graded 16 articles using our checklist. On average, the articles met 6.81 of our 19 categories (36.7%). No articles contained any cost-benefit analyses and few were adequately transparent. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant room for improvement in modeling pandemic policy. Issues often arise from a lack of transparency, poor modeling assumptions, lack of a system-wide perspective in modeling, and lack of flexibility in the academic system to rapidly iterate modeling as new information becomes available. In anticipation of future challenges, we encourage the modeling community at large to contribute toward the refinement and consensus of a shared set of standards for infectious disease policy modeling.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • academic community and acute respiratory syndrome: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
    • academic community and adequately address: 1
    • academic community and long term short: 1, 2
    • access time and acute respiratory syndrome: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
    • access time and additional citation: 1
    • access time and additional cost: 1, 2
    • access time and long term short: 1, 2, 3
    • accuracy maintain and acute respiratory syndrome: 1
    • accurate remain and acute respiratory syndrome: 1, 2
    • acute respiratory syndrome and additional cost: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
    • acute respiratory syndrome and adequately address: 1, 2, 3, 4
    • acute respiratory syndrome and long term short: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • acute respiratory syndrome and long term short impact: 1, 2
    • additional cost and long term short: 1