ArticleBMC infectious diseases2022
Sensitivity of contact-tracing for COVID-19 in Thailand: a capture-recapture application.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Performance and utility of contact tracing for COVID-19 in the WHO South-East Asia Region: implications for future pandemic preparedness.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe investigate the completeness of contact tracing for COVID-19 during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand, from early January 2020 to 30 June 2020.
methodsUni-list capture-recapture models were applied to the frequency distributions of index cases to inform two questions: (1) the unobserved number of index cases with contacts, and (2) the unobserved number of index cases with secondary cases among their contacts.
resultsGeneralized linear models (using Poisson and logistic families) did not return any significant predictor (age, sex, nationality, number of contacts per case) on the risk of transmission and hence capture-recapture models did not adjust for observed heterogeneity. Best fitting models, a zero truncated negative binomial for question 1 and zero-truncated Poisson for question 2, returned sensitivity estimates for contact tracing performance of 77.6% (95% CI = 73.75-81.54%) and 67.6% (95% CI = 53.84-81.38%), respectively. A zero-inflated negative binomial model on the distribution of index cases with secondary cases allowed the estimation of the effective reproduction number at 0.14 (95% CI = 0.09-0.22), and the overdispersion parameter at 0.1.
conclusionCompleteness of COVID-19 contact tracing in Thailand during the first wave appeared moderate, with around 67% of infectious transmission chains detected. Overdispersion was present suggesting that most of the index cases did not result in infectious transmission chains and the majority of transmission events stemmed from a small proportion of index cases.
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.