Tomov Latchezar, Miteva Dimitrina, Sekulovski Metodija, Batselova Hristiana, Velikova Tsvetelina
Department of Informatics, New Bulgarian University, Sofia 1618, Bulgaria.
Department of Genetics, Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski", Sofia 1164, Bulgaria.
World J Methodol. 2022 Sep 20;12(5):392-401. doi: 10.5662/wjm.v12.i5.392.
Managing a pandemic is a difficult task. Pandemics are part of the dynamics of nonlinear systems with multiple different interactive features that co-adapt to each other (such as humans, animals, and pathogens). The target of controlling such a nonlinear system is best achieved using the control system theory developed in engineering and applied in systems biology. But is this theory and its principles actually used in controlling the current coronavirus disease-19 pandemic? We review the evidence for applying principles in different aspects of pandemic control related to different goals such as disease eradication, disease containment, and short- or long-term economic loss minimization. Successful policies implement multiple measures in concordance with control theory to achieve a robust response. In contrast, unsuccessful policies have numerous failures in different measures or focus only on a single measure (only testing, vaccines, ). Successful approaches rely on predictions instead of reactions to compensate for the costs of time delay, on knowledge-based analysis instead of trial-and-error, to control complex nonlinear systems, and on risk assessment instead of waiting for more evidence. Iran is an example of the effects of delayed response due to waiting for evidence to arrive instead of a proper risk analytical approach. New Zealand, Australia, and China are examples of appropriate application of basic control theoretic principles and focusing on long-term adaptive strategies, updating measures with the evolution of the pandemic.
管理一场大流行是一项艰巨的任务。大流行是非线性系统动态变化的一部分,具有多种相互作用的不同特征(如人类、动物和病原体),这些特征相互共同适应。控制这样一个非线性系统的目标,最好通过工程学中发展并应用于系统生物学的控制系统理论来实现。但这一理论及其原则实际上是否被用于控制当前的新型冠状病毒肺炎大流行呢?我们审查了在与不同目标相关的大流行控制不同方面应用这些原则的证据,这些目标如疾病根除、疾病遏制以及短期或长期经济损失最小化。成功的政策会按照控制理论协调实施多项措施,以实现强有力的应对。相比之下,不成功的政策在不同措施上存在诸多失误,或者只专注于单一措施(仅检测、疫苗等)。成功的方法依靠预测而非反应来弥补时间延迟成本,依靠基于知识的分析而非反复试验来控制复杂的非线性系统,依靠风险评估而非等待更多证据。伊朗就是一个因等待证据而非采用适当的风险分析方法而导致应对延迟的例子。新西兰、澳大利亚和中国是恰当应用基本控制理论原则并注重长期适应性策略、随着大流行的演变更新措施的例子。