Analyzing the Costs and Benefits of Utilizing a Mixed-Strategy Approach in Infectious Disease Control under a Voluntary Vaccination Policy.

Abstract

Infectious diseases pose significant public health risks, necessitating effective control strategies. One such strategy is implementing a voluntary vaccination policy, which grants individuals the autonomy to make their own decisions regarding vaccination. However, exploring different approaches to optimize disease control outcomes is imperative, and involves assessing their associated costs and benefits. This study analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of employing a mixed-strategy approach under a voluntary vaccination policy in infectious disease control. We examine the potential benefits of such an approach by utilizing a vaccination game model that incorporates cost and benefit factors, where lower costs and higher benefits lead to reduced infection rates. Here, we introduce a mixed-strategy framework that combines individual-based risk assessment (IB-RA) and society-based risk assessment (SB-RA) strategies. A novel dynamical equation is proposed that captures the decision-making process of individuals as they choose their strategy based on personal or communal considerations. In addition, we explore the implications of the mixed-strategy approach within the context of social dilemmas. We examine deviations from expected behavior and the concept of social efficiency deficit (SED) by allowing for the evolution of vaccine strategy preferences alongside risk perception. By comprehensively evaluating the financial implications and societal advantages associated with the mixed-strategy approach, decision-makers can allocate resources and implement measures to combat infectious diseases within the framework of a voluntary vaccination policy.