2020
DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00959-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On Pandemic Preparedness: How Well is the Modeling Community Prepared for COVID-19?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 18 publications
(19 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…When evaluating the value of a particular intervention, practice guidelines, such as those promulgated by the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine (hereafter the Second Panel) and the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review in the United States, recognize the importance of capturing relevant impacts on all stakeholders, 13 , 21 , 22 yet most economic evaluations before the COVID-19 pandemic did not account for nonhealth impacts. 23 , 24 There have been systematic reviews of COVID-19 interventions, but many have excluded economic considerations altogether and have not considered the effects of non-health impacts or distributional issues. For example, one review of physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection focused solely on the transmission effects, excluding cost considerations, although they did consider equity impacts.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When evaluating the value of a particular intervention, practice guidelines, such as those promulgated by the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine (hereafter the Second Panel) and the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review in the United States, recognize the importance of capturing relevant impacts on all stakeholders, 13 , 21 , 22 yet most economic evaluations before the COVID-19 pandemic did not account for nonhealth impacts. 23 , 24 There have been systematic reviews of COVID-19 interventions, but many have excluded economic considerations altogether and have not considered the effects of non-health impacts or distributional issues. For example, one review of physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection focused solely on the transmission effects, excluding cost considerations, although they did consider equity impacts.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%