Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40343962›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2025

Contact tracing strategies for infectious diseases: A systematic literature review.

Danielle Guy, Petya Kodjamanova, Lena Woldmann, Jyoti Sahota, Melanie Bannister-Tyrrell, Yajna Elouard, Marie-Amélie Degail

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Danielle GuyAmaris, Health Economics and Market Access, Barcelona, Spain.
Petya KodjamanovaAmaris, Health Economics and Market Access, London, United Kingdom.
Lena WoldmannAmaris, Health Economics and Market Access, Barcelona, Spain.
Jyoti SahotaAmaris, Health Economics and Market Access, Toronto, Canada.
Melanie Bannister-TyrrellNossal Institute for Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0161-2952
Yajna ElouardWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9078-6865
Marie-Amélie DegailWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5522-7515

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contact tracing has been a crucial public health strategy for breaking infectious diseases chains of transmission. Although many resources exist for disease outbreak management none address the rationale of contact tracing. This comprehensive review aims to evaluate contact tracing strategies, their effectiveness, and health systems governance across various diseases to inform a disease-agnostic contact tracing guideline. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42023474507) and follows Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Descriptive and interventional studies in the six official United Nations languages were included, excluding modelling studies and animal-to-human transmission. An electronic search was conducted in Embase, Medline, Medline-in-process, and Cochrane libraries from inception to September 2023. The revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions were used for bias assessment. The search yielded 378 studies, primarily from Europe (29.6%) and North America (21.6%) and focusing on diseases such as the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) (47.4%) or tuberculosis (26.7%). 244 (64.5%) studies addressed contact tracing definitions, commonly based on physical proximity, including duration of contact and sexual partnerships (47.6%) and household exposure (27%). Effectiveness was examined in 330 (87.3%) studies, showing variation across diseases and contexts, with only five studies evaluating epidemiological impacts. Socio-cultural aspects were covered in 166 (43.9%) studies, revealing that stigma and public trust may affect the adherence to contact tracing. Health systems governance was discussed in 278 (73.5%) studies, emphasising the need for coordination among international organisations, national governments, and local health authorities, alongside a sustained and adequately supported workforce. This review provides critical insights into optimising contact tracing strategies. Effective contact tracing requires robust health systems governance, adequate resources, and community involvement. Future research should focus on establishing standardised metrics for comparative analysis and investigating the impact of contact tracing on disease incidence and mortality.

Identifiers

PMID40343962
PMCPMC12063836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.