ArticleInfectious Disease Modelling2022
Modeling the impact of surveillance activities combined with physical distancing interventions on COVID-19 epidemics at a local level.
Article in Infectious Disease Modelling, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Consistent Healthcare Safety Recommendation System for Preventing Contagious Disease Infections in Human Crowds.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physical distancing and contact tracing are two key components in controlling the COVID-19 epidemics. Understanding their interaction at local level is important for policymakers. We propose a flexible modeling framework to assess the effect of combining contact tracing with different physical distancing strategies. Using scenario tree analyses, we compute the probability of COVID-19 detection using passive surveillance, with and without contact tracing, in metropolitan Barcelona. The estimates of detection probability and the frequency of daily social contacts are fitted into an age-structured susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered compartmental model to simulate the epidemics considering different physical distancing scenarios over a period of 26 weeks. With the original Wuhan strain, the probability of detecting an infected individual without implementing physical distancing would have been 0.465, 0.515, 0.617, and 0.665 in designated age groups (0-14, 15-49, 50-64, and >65), respectively. As the physical distancing measures were reinforced and the disease circulation decreased, the interaction between the two interventions resulted in a reduction of the detection probabilities; however, despite this reduction, active contact tracing and isolation remained an effective supplement to physical distancing. If we relied solely on passive surveillance for diagnosing COVID-19, the model required a minimal 50% (95% credible interval, 39-69%) reduction of daily social contacts to keep the infected population under 5%, as compared to the 36% (95% credible interval, 22-56%) reduction with contact tracing systems. The simulation with the B.1.1.7 and B.1.167.2 strains shows similar results. Our simulations showed that a functioning contact tracing program would reduce the need for physical distancing and mitigate the COVID-19 epidemics.
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.