ReviewBMC infectious diseases2024
New framework to assess tracing and testing based on South Korea's response to COVID-19.
Review in BMC infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reassessing Early COVID-19 Strategies in East Asia: Insights From Japan and Korea.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2026Review
- COVID-19 transmission dynamics: age-specific patterns and super spreaders in South Korea.BMC public health · 2026Article
- MIS-C Overlap, Not Prior COVID-19 Itself, Drives Treatment Escalation in Kawasaki Disease: A Nationwide Cohort Study.Pediatrics international : official journal of the Japan Pediatric SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
South Korea's remarkable success in controlling the spread of COVID-19 during the pre-Omicron period was based on extensive contact tracing and large-scale testing. Here we suggest a general criterion for tracing and testing based on South Korea's experience, and propose a new framework to assess tracing and testing. We reviewed papers on South Korea's response to COVID-19 to capture its concept of tracing and testing. South Korea expanded its testing capabilities to enable group tracing combined with preemptive testing, and to conduct open testing. According to our proposed model, COVID-19 cases are classified into 4 types: confirmed in quarantine, source known, source unknown, and unidentified. The proportion of the first two case types among confirmed cases is defined as "traced proportion", and used as the indicator of tracing and testing effectiveness. In conclusion, South Korea successfully suppressed COVID-19 transmission by maintaining a high traced proportion (> 60%) using group tracing in conjunction with preemptive testing as a complementary strategy to traditional contact tracing.
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.