Abstract

ObjectivesWe contribute a new methodological approach to the ongoing efforts towards evaluating public health surveillance. Specifically, we apply a descriptive framework, grounded in prospect theory (PT), for the evaluation of decisions on disease surveillance deployment. We focus on two attributes of any surveillance system: timeliness, and false positive rate (FPR).MethodsIn a sample of 69 health professionals from a number of health related networks polled online, we elicited PT preferences, specifically respondents’ attitudes towards gains, losses and probabilities (i.e., if they overweight or underweight extreme probabilities) by means of a series of lotteries for either timeliness or FPR. Moreover, we estimated willingness to pay (WTP) for improvements in the two surveillance attributes. For contextualization, we apply our framework to rabies surveillance.ResultsOur data reveal considerable probability weighting, both for gains and losses. In other words, respondents underestimate their chances of getting a good outcome in uncertain situations, and they overestimate their chances of bad outcomes. Moreover, there is convex utility for losses and loss aversion, that is, losses loom larger than gains of the same absolute magnitude to the respondents. We find no differences between the estimated parameters for timeliness and FPR. The median WTP is $7,250 per day gained in detection time and $30 per 1/10,000 reduction in FPR.ConclusionOur results indicate that the biases described by PT are present among public health professionals, which highlights the need to incorporate a PT framework when eliciting their preferences for surveillance systems.

Highlights

  • Disease surveillance system (DSS) evaluation is a topical issue that has led to the development of multiple frameworks and methods

  • Our data reveal considerable probability weighting, both for gains and losses. Respondents underestimate their chances of getting a good outcome in uncertain situations, and they overestimate their chances of bad outcomes

  • We find no differences between the estimated parameters for timeliness and false positive rate (FPR)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Disease surveillance system (DSS) evaluation is a topical issue that has led to the development of multiple frameworks and methods. Improvement (deterioration) in timeliness and FPR deliver some level of utility (disutility), understood as the satisfaction or usefulness derived from the materialization of those attributes, to the relevant surveillance stakeholders. In a gains setting context, where increased surveillance investments may lead to improved timeliness and FPR vs a loss setting context with surveillance de-investments possibly leading to inferior timeliness and FPR. Assessment of this utility (disutility), adjusted for known biases (see below), should be an integral part of any surveillance evaluation

Objectives
Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.