IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0246235.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prioritizing investments in rapid response vaccine technologies for emerging infections: A portfolio decision analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Dimitrios Gouglas
  • Kevin Marsh

Abstract

This study reports on the application of a Portfolio Decision Analysis (PDA) to support investment decisions of a non-profit funder of vaccine technology platform development for rapid response to emerging infections. A value framework was constructed via document reviews and stakeholder consultations. Probability of Success (PoS) data was obtained for 16 platform projects through expert assessments and stakeholder portfolio preferences via a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE). The structure of preferences and the uncertainties in project PoS suggested a non-linear, stochastic value maximization problem. A simulation-optimization algorithm was employed, identifying optimal portfolios under different budget constraints. Stochastic dominance of the optimization solution was tested via mean-variance and mean-Gini statistics, and its robustness via rank probability analysis in a Monte Carlo simulation. Project PoS estimates were low and substantially overlapping. The DCE identified decreasing rates of return to investing in single platform types. Optimal portfolio solutions reflected this non-linearity of platform preferences along an efficiency frontier and diverged from a model simply ranking projects by PoS-to-Cost, despite significant revisions to project PoS estimates during the review process in relation to the conduct of the DCE. Large confidence intervals associated with optimization solutions suggested significant uncertainty in portfolio valuations. Mean-variance and Mean-Gini tests suggested optimal portfolios with higher expected values were also accompanied by higher risks of not achieving those values despite stochastic dominance of the optimal portfolio solution under the decision maker’s budget constraint. This portfolio was also the highest ranked portfolio in the simulation; though having only a 54% probability of being preferred to the second-ranked portfolio. The analysis illustrates how optimization modelling can help health R&D decision makers identify optimal portfolios in the face of significant decision uncertainty involving portfolio trade-offs. However, in light of such extreme uncertainty, further due diligence and ongoing updating of performance is needed on highly risky projects as well as data on decision makers’ portfolio risk attitude before PDA can conclude about optimal and robust solutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Dimitrios Gouglas & Kevin Marsh, 2021. "Prioritizing investments in rapid response vaccine technologies for emerging infections: A portfolio decision analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-21, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0246235
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246235
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0246235
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0246235&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0246235?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dimitrios Gouglas & Kendall Hoyt & Elizabeth Peacocke & Aristidis Kaloudis & Trygve Ottersen & John-Arne Røttingen, 2019. "Setting Strategic Objectives for the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations: An Exploratory Decision Analysis Process," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 430-446, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Axel C. Mühlbacher & Andrew Sadler & Yvonne Jordan, 2022. "Population preferences for non-pharmaceutical interventions to control the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: trade-offs among public health, individual rights, and economics," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(9), pages 1483-1496, December.
    2. Joseph Barberio & Jacob Becraft & Zied Ben Chaouch & Dimitris Bertsimas & Tasuku Kitada & Michael L. Li & Andrew W. Lo & Kevin Shi & Qingyang Xu, 2022. "Accelerating Vaccine Innovation for Emerging Infectious Diseases via Parallel Discovery," NBER Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, volume 2, pages 9-39, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dan Bumblauskas & Amy Igou & Salil Kalghatgi & Cole Wetzel, 2022. "Public Policy and Broader Applications for the Use of Text Analytics During Pandemics," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 568-581, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0246235. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.