ArticleJAMA network open2022
Estimated COVID-19 Cases and Hospitalizations Averted by Case Investigation and Contact Tracing in the US.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic Review of Contact Investigation Costs for Tuberculosis, United States.Emerging infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Disease Intervention Specialist-Delivered Interventions and Other Partner Services for HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infections: A Systematic Review.American journal of preventive medicine · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic literature review on public health and healthcare resources for pandemic preparedness planning.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Outbreak investigations after identifying carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a systematic review.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2023Pooled it
- Simplifying Public Health Recommendations: Use of a Public CDC Chatbot During the COVID-19 Pandemic, 2022-2024.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974) · 2026Article
- Optimal pandemic control strategies and cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions in the United States.BMC global and public health · 2025Article
- Contact Tracing During the COVID-19 Epidemic: Insights from the Experience of the Veneto Region in Italy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the New York City COVID-19 case investigation and contact tracing program: a cascade of care analysis.BMC public health · 2024Article
- The public health impact of COVID-19 variants of concern on the effectiveness of contact tracing in Vermont, United States.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Estimated public health impact of concurrent mask mandate and vaccinate-or-test requirement in Illinois, October to December 2021.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Evaluating completion rates of COVID-19 contact tracing surveys in New York City.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Building a Simple Model to Assess the Impact of Case Investigation and Contact Tracing for Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Lessons From COVID-19.AJPM focus · 2024Article
- Adapting COVID-19 Contact Tracing Protocols to Accommodate Resource Constraints, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 2021.Emerging infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of Washington State's digital COVID-19 exposure notification system over one pandemic year.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Modernizing the Objectives and Organization of Case Investigation and Contact Tracing for the 21st Century.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2023Article
- COVID-19, HIV, and Syphilis Contact Tracing: What Have We Learned and Where Are We Headed?Sexually transmitted diseases · 2023Article
- Creating a Sexually Transmitted Infection Disease Intervention Workforce for the 21st Century.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2023Article
- Isolation and Quarantine for Coronavirus Disease 2019 in the United States, 2020-2022.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2023Article
- Estimated Cases Averted by COVID-19 Digital Exposure Notification, Pennsylvania, USA, November 8, 2020-January 2, 2021.Emerging infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Employee investigation and contact tracing program in a pediatric cancer hospital to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 among the workforce, patients, and caregivers.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Evidence of the impact of COVID-19 case investigation and contact tracing (CICT) programs is lacking, but policy makers need this evidence to assess the value of such programs. Objective: To estimate COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations averted nationwide by US states' CICT programs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytical model study used combined data from US CICT programs (eg, proportion of cases interviewed, contacts notified or monitored, and days to case and contact notification) with incidence data to model outcomes of CICT over a 60-day period (November 25, 2020, to January 23, 2021). The study estimated a range of outcomes by varying assumed compliance with isolation and quarantine recommendations. Fifty-nine state and territorial health departments that received federal funding supporting COVID-19 pandemic response activities were eligible for inclusion. Data analysis was performed from July to September 2021. Exposure: Public health case investigation and contact tracing. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were numbers of cases and hospitalizations averted and the percentage of cases averted among cases not prevented by vaccination and other nonpharmaceutical interventions. Results: In total, 22 states and 1 territory reported all measures necessary for the analysis. These 23 jurisdictions covered 42.5% of the US population (approximately 140 million persons), spanned all 4 US Census regions, and reported data that reflected all 59 federally funded CICT programs. This study estimated that 1.11 million cases and 27 231 hospitalizations were averted by CICT programs under a scenario where 80% of interviewed cases and monitored contacts and 30% of notified contacts fully complied with isolation and quarantine guidance, eliminating their contributions to future transmission. As many as 1.36 million cases and 33 527 hospitalizations could have been prevented if all interviewed cases and monitored contacts had entered into and fully complied with isolation and quarantine guidelines upon being interviewed or notified. Across both scenarios and all jurisdictions, CICT averted an estimated median of 21.2% (range, 1.3%-65.8%) of the cases not prevented by vaccination and other nonpharmaceutical interventions. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that CICT programs likely had a substantial role in curtailing the pandemic in most jurisdictions during the 2020 to 2021 winter peak. Differences in outcomes across jurisdictions indicate an opportunity to further improve CICT effectiveness. These estimates demonstrate the potential benefits from sustaining and improving these programs.
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.