Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34053257›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2021

Engagement and adherence trade-offs for SARS-CoV-2 contact tracing.

Tim C D Lucas, Emma L Davis, Diepreye Ayabina, Anna Borlase, Thomas Crellen, Li Pi, Graham F Medley, Lucy Yardley, Petra Klepac, Julia Gog and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Modelling that shaped the early COVID-19 pandemic response in the UK.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  7. Using a household-structured branching process to analyse contact tracing in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  8. A case for location based contact tracing.Health care management science · 2021
    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

11 authors.

Tim C D LucasBig Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Emma L DavisBig Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Diepreye AyabinaBig Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Anna BorlaseBig Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Thomas CrellenBig Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Li PiBig Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Graham F MedleyMathSys CDT, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Lucy YardleySchool of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Petra KlepacDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Julia GogDepartment for Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
T Déirdre HollingsworthBig Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/V038613/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 210758/Z/18/ZWellcome Trust 215919/Z/19/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contact tracing is an important tool for allowing countries to ease lockdown policies introduced to combat SARS-CoV-2. For contact tracing to be effective, those with symptoms must self-report themselves while their contacts must self-isolate when asked. However, policies such as legal enforcement of self-isolation can create trade-offs by dissuading individuals from self-reporting. We use an existing branching process model to examine which aspects of contact tracing adherence should be prioritized. We consider an inverse relationship between self-isolation adherence and self-reporting engagement, assuming that increasingly strict self-isolation policies will result in fewer individuals self-reporting to the programme. We find that policies which increase the average duration of self-isolation, or that increase the probability that people self-isolate at all, at the expense of reduced self-reporting rate, will not decrease the risk of a large outbreak and may increase the risk, depending on the strength of the trade-off. These results suggest that policies to increase self-isolation adherence should be implemented carefully. Policies that increase self-isolation adherence at the cost of self-reporting rates should be avoided. This article is part of the theme issue 'Modelling that shaped the early COVID-19 pandemic response in the UK'.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalPandemicsBasic Reproduction NumberCommunicable Disease ControlContact TracingCOVID-19Disease OutbreaksHumansSARS-CoV-2adherencecase isolationcontact tracingCOVID-19quarantineSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID34053257
PMCPMC8165588

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.