ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2023
Isolation and Quarantine for Coronavirus Disease 2019 in the United States, 2020-2022.
Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modeling the impact of adherence to U.S. isolation and masking guidance on SARS-CoV-2 transmission in office workplaces in 2021-2022.Epidemics · 2026Article
- Modeling the impact of adherence to U.S. isolation and masking guidance on SARS-CoV-2 transmission in office workplaces in 2021-2022.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Case Report: Retrospective discovery ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Belgium's SARS-CoV-2 contact tracing effectively curbed transmission, yet challenges persist in terms of delays, scalability and population adherence.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Adapting COVID-19 Contact Tracing Protocols to Accommodate Resource Constraints, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 2021.Emerging infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Representativeness of a national, probability-based panel survey of COVID-19 isolation practices-United States, 2020-2022.Frontiers in epidemiology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of Washington State's digital COVID-19 exposure notification system over one pandemic year.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Mental health variables affecting Quality of Life (QOL) among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Jazan City, Saudi Arabia.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Home-Based Testing and COVID-19 Isolation Recommendations, United States.Emerging infectious diseases · 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
18 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPublic health programs varied in ability to reach people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and their contacts to encourage separation from others. For both adult case patients with COVID-19 and their contacts, we estimated the impact of contact tracing activities on separation behaviors from January 2020 until March 2022.
methodsWe used a probability-based panel survey of a nationally representative sample to gather data for estimates and comparisons.
resultsAn estimated 64 255 351 adults reported a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 test result; 79.6% isolated for ≥5 days, 60.2% isolated for ≥10 days, and 79.2% self-notified contacts. A total of, 24 057 139 (37.7%) completed a case investigation, and 46.2% of them reported contacts to health officials. More adults who completed a case investigation isolated than those who did not complete a case investigation (≥5 days, 82.6% vs 78.2%, respectively; ≥10 days, 69.8% vs 54.8%; both P < .05). A total of 84 946 636 adults were contacts of a COVID-19 case patient. Of these, 73.1% learned of their exposure directly from a case patient; 49.4% quarantined for ≥5 days, 18.7% quarantined for ≥14 days, and 13.5% completed a contact tracing call. More quarantined among those who completed a contact tracing call than among those who did not complete a tracing call (≥5 days, 61.2% vs 48.5%, respectively; ≥14 days, 25.2% vs 18.0%; both P < .05).
conclusionsEngagement in contact tracing was positively correlated with isolation and quarantine. However, most adults with COVID-19 isolated and self-notified contacts regardless of whether the public health workforce was able to reach them. Identifying and reaching contacts was challenging and limited the ability to promote quarantining, and testing.
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.