Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33772002›Full record

ArticleNature communications2021

Stochastic sampling effects favor manual over digital contact tracing.

Marco Mancastroppa, Claudio Castellano, Alessandro Vezzani, Raffaella Burioni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Marco MancastroppaDipartimento di Scienze Matematiche, Fisiche e Informatiche, Università degli Studi di Parma, Parco Area delle Scienze, Parma, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7344-7992
Claudio CastellanoIstituto dei Sistemi Complessi (ISC-CNR), Via dei Taurini, Roma, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3773-3801
Alessandro VezzaniDipartimento di Scienze Matematiche, Fisiche e Informatiche, Università degli Studi di Parma, Parco Area delle Scienze, Parma, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9779-6150
Raffaella BurioniDipartimento di Scienze Matematiche, Fisiche e Informatiche, Università degli Studi di Parma, Parco Area delle Scienze, Parma, Italy. raffaella.burioni@unipr.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4648-6838

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Isolation of symptomatic individuals, tracing and testing of their nonsymptomatic contacts are fundamental strategies for mitigating the current COVID-19 pandemic. The breaking of contagion chains relies on two complementary strategies: manual reconstruction of contacts based on interviews and a digital (app-based) privacy-preserving contact tracing. We compare their effectiveness using model parameters tailored to describe SARS-CoV-2 diffusion within the activity-driven model, a general empirically validated framework for network dynamics. We show that, even for equal probability of tracing a contact, manual tracing robustly performs better than the digital protocol, also taking into account the intrinsic delay and limited scalability of the manual procedure. This result is explained in terms of the stochastic sampling occurring during the case-by-case manual reconstruction of contacts, contrasted with the intrinsically prearranged nature of digital tracing, determined by the decision to adopt the app or not by each individual. The better performance of manual tracing is enhanced by heterogeneity in agent behavior: superspreaders not adopting the app are completely invisible to digital contact tracing, while they can be easily traced manually, due to their multiple contacts. We show that this intrinsic difference makes the manual procedure dominant in realistic hybrid protocols.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsContact TracingCOVID-19Diagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansModels, TheoreticalPandemicsQuarantineSARS-CoV-2Specimen HandlingStochastic Processes

Identifiers

PMID33772002
PMCPMC7997996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.