Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About

University of Warwick
Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research

  • WRAP
    • Home
    • Search WRAP
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse WRAP by Year
    • Browse WRAP by Subject
    • Browse WRAP by Department
    • Browse WRAP by Funder
    • Browse Theses by Department
  • Publications Service
    • Home
    • Search Publications Service
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse Publications service by Year
    • Browse Publications service by Subject
    • Browse Publications service by Department
    • Browse Publications service by Funder
  • Help & Advice
University of Warwick

The Library

  • Login
  • Admin

Harnessing multiple models for outbreak management

Tools
- Tools
+ Tools

Shea, Katriona, Runge, Michael C., Pannell, David, Probert, William J. M., Li, Shou-Li, Tildesley, Michael J. and Ferrari, Matthew (2020) Harnessing multiple models for outbreak management. Science, 368 (6491). pp. 577-579. doi:10.1126/science.abb9934

Research output not available from this repository, contact author.
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.abb9934

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has triggered efforts by multiple modeling groups to forecast disease trajectory, assess interventions, and improve understanding of the pathogen. Such models can often differ substantially in their projections and recommendations, reflecting different policy assumptions and objectives, as well as scientific, logistical, and other uncertainty about biological and management processes (1). Disparate predictions during any outbreak can hinder intervention planning and response by policy-makers (2, 3), who may instead choose to rely on single trusted sources of advice, or on consensus where it appears. Thus, valuable insights and information from other models may be overlooked, limiting the opportunity for decision-makers to account for risk and uncertainty and resulting in more lives lost or resources used than necessary. We advocate a more systematic approach, by merging two well-established research fields. The first element involves formal expert elicitation methods applied to multiple models to deliberately generate, retain, and synthesize valuable individual model ideas and share important insights during group discussions, while minimizing various cognitive biases. The second element uses a decision-theoretic framework to capture and account for within- and between-model uncertainty as we evaluate actions in a timely manner to achieve management objectives.

Item Type: Journal Article
Divisions: Faculty of Science > Life Sciences (2010- )
Journal or Publication Title: Science
Publisher: American Association for the Advancement of Science
ISSN: 0036-8075
Official Date: 8 May 2020
Dates:
DateEvent
8 May 2020Published
2020Accepted
Volume: 368
Number: 6491
Page Range: pp. 577-579
DOI: 10.1126/science.abb9934
Status: Peer Reviewed
Publication Status: Published
Publisher Statement: “This is the author’s version of the work. It is posted here by permission of the AAAS for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Science on 368, 8/05/2020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.abb9934
Access rights to Published version: Restricted or Subscription Access

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item View Item
twitter

Email us: wrap@warwick.ac.uk
Contact Details
About Us