Back

An imperfect tool: COVID-19 'test & trace' success relies on minimising the impact of false negatives and continuation of physical distancing.

Davis, E. L.; Lucas, T. C. D.; Borlase, A.; Pollington, T. M.; Abbott, S.; Ayabina, D.; Crellen, T.; Hellewell, J.; Pi, L.; Medley, G. F.; Hollingsworth, T. D.; Klepac, P.

2020-08-21 public and global health
10.1101/2020.06.09.20124008 medRxiv
Show abstract

Emerging evidence suggests that contact tracing has had limited success in the UK in reducing the R number across the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigate potential pitfalls and areas for improvement by extending an existing branching process contact tracing model, adding diagnostic testing and refining parameter estimates. Our results demonstrate that reporting and adherence are the most important predictors of programme impact but tracing coverage and speed plus diagnostic sensitivity also play an important role. We conclude that well-implemented contact tracing could bring small but potentially important benefits to controlling and preventing outbreaks, providing up to a 15% reduction in R, and reaffirm that contact tracing is not currently appropriate as the sole control measure.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.