SynthesisBMJ open2021
Effectiveness of contact tracing apps for SARS-CoV-2: a rapid systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- COVID-19 Contact Tracing Strategies During the First Wave of the Pandemic: Systematic Review of Published Studies.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2023Pooled it
- Evaluation of the Finnish Exposure Notification App "Koronavilkku" According to Key Performance Indicators: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2026Article
- Accounting for contact tracing in epidemiological birth-death models.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Mathematical Contact Tracing Models for the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Contact tracing strategies for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Test allocation based on risk of infection from first and second order contact tracing.PloS one · 2025Article
- Developing and validating a content quality evaluation tool for cancer mobile applications.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Contextual Acceptance of COVID-19 Mitigation Mobile Apps in the United States: Mixed Methods Survey Study on Postpandemic Data Privacy.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Non-pharmaceutical interventions to reduce COVID-19 transmission in the UK: a rapid mapping review and interactive evidence gap map.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2024Review
- The effects of public health and social measures (PHSM) implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic: An overview of systematic reviews.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2024Review
- Article
- Mobile Apps for COVID-19: A Systematic Review of Reviews.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Influence parental- and child-related factors on the acceptance of SARS-CoV-2 test methods in schools and daycare facilities.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- The epidemiological impact of digital and manual contact tracing on the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in the Netherlands: Empirical evidence.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- Community-Based Digital Contact Tracing of Emerging Infectious Diseases: Design and Implementation Study With Empirical COVID-19 Cases.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Individual level analysis of digital proximity tracing for COVID-19 in Belgium highlights major bottlenecks.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Impacts of public health and social measures on COVID-19 in Europe: a review and modified Delphi technique.Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
- The Dutch COVID-19 Notification App: Lessons Learned From a Mixed Methods Evaluation Among End Users and Contact-Tracing Employees.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- The German COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing App: A Socioeconomic Evaluation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic.Lancet (London, England) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically review evidence on effectiveness of contact tracing apps (CTAs) for SARS-CoV-2 on epidemiological and clinical outcomes.
designRapid systematic review. DATA SOURCES: EMBASE (OVID), MEDLINE (PubMed), BioRxiv and MedRxiv were searched up to 28 October 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Studies, both empirical and model-based, assessing effect of CTAs for SARS-CoV-2 on reproduction number (R), total number of infections, hospitalisation rate, mortality rate, and other epidemiologically and clinically relevant outcomes, were eligible for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION: Empirical and model-based studies were critically appraised using separate checklists. Data on type of study (ie, empirical or model-based), sample size, (simulated) time horizon, study population, CTA type (and associated interventions), comparator and outcomes assessed, were extracted. The most important findings were extracted and narratively summarised. Specifically for model-based studies, characteristics and values of important model parameters were collected.
results2140 studies were identified, of which 17 studies (2 empirical, 15 model-based studies) were eligible and included in this review. Both empirical studies were observational (non-randomised) studies and at high risk of bias, most importantly due to risk of confounding. Risk of bias of model-based studies was considered low for 12 out of 15 studies. Most studies demonstrated beneficial effects of CTAs on R, total number of infections and mortality rate. No studies assessed effect on hospitalisation. Effect size was dependent on model parameters values used, but in general, a beneficial effect was observed at CTA adoption rates of 20% or higher.
conclusionsCTAs have the potential to be effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 related epidemiological and clinical outcomes, though effect size depends on other model parameters (eg, proportion of asymptomatic individuals, or testing delays), and interventions after CTA notification. Methodologically sound comparative empirical studies on effectiveness of CTAs are required to confirm findings from model-based studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.