Engagement and adherence trade-offs for SARS-CoV-2 contact tracing.
COVID-19
SARS-CoV-2
adherence
case isolation
contact tracing
quarantine
Journal
Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences
ISSN: 1471-2970
Titre abrégé: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7503623
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 07 2021
19 07 2021
Historique:
entrez:
31
5
2021
pubmed:
1
6
2021
medline:
11
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Contact tracing is an important tool for allowing countries to ease lockdown policies introduced to combat SARS-CoV-2. For contact tracing to be effective, those with symptoms must self-report themselves while their contacts must self-isolate when asked. However, policies such as legal enforcement of self-isolation can create trade-offs by dissuading individuals from self-reporting. We use an existing branching process model to examine which aspects of contact tracing adherence should be prioritized. We consider an inverse relationship between self-isolation adherence and self-reporting engagement, assuming that increasingly strict self-isolation policies will result in fewer individuals self-reporting to the programme. We find that policies which increase the average duration of self-isolation, or that increase the probability that people self-isolate at all, at the expense of reduced self-reporting rate, will not decrease the risk of a large outbreak and may increase the risk, depending on the strength of the trade-off. These results suggest that policies to increase self-isolation adherence should be implemented carefully. Policies that increase self-isolation adherence at the cost of self-reporting rates should be avoided. This article is part of the theme issue 'Modelling that shaped the early COVID-19 pandemic response in the UK'.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34053257
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0270
pmc: PMC8165588
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
20200270Subventions
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/V038613/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 215919/Z/19/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 210758/Z/18/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Références
Mayo Clin Proc. 2012 Jun;87(6):548-54
pubmed: 22551906
J Clin Virol. 2020 Jul;128:104412
pubmed: 32416600
Wellcome Open Res. 2020 Apr 9;5:67
pubmed: 32685698
Nature. 2005 Nov 17;438(7066):355-9
pubmed: 16292310
JAMA. 2020 Jun 2;323(21):2129-2130
pubmed: 32324202
Biochem Soc Trans. 2006 Dec;34(Pt 6):1151-4
pubmed: 17073773
Lancet Public Health. 2020 Aug;5(8):e452-e459
pubmed: 32682487
Biosecur Bioterror. 2004;2(4):265-72
pubmed: 15650436
Epidemics. 2020 Dec;33:100425
pubmed: 33307443
PLoS One. 2010 Jun 18;5(6):e11226
pubmed: 20585462
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Aug 18;173(4):262-267
pubmed: 32422057
J Clin Virol. 2019 Sep;118:28-35
pubmed: 31400670
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 May 24;17(10):
pubmed: 32456346
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jul 28;17(15):
pubmed: 32731369
Swiss Med Wkly. 2020 Aug 05;150:w20336
pubmed: 32757177
Br J Health Psychol. 2020 Nov;25(4):945-956
pubmed: 32428385
Nat Hum Behav. 2020 Sep;4(9):964-971
pubmed: 32759985
N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 26;382(13):1199-1207
pubmed: 31995857
Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Apr;8(4):e488-e496
pubmed: 32119825
N Engl J Med. 2020 Sep 24;383(13):1283-1286
pubmed: 32857487
Science. 2020 May 8;368(6491):
pubmed: 32234805
Am J Bioeth. 2009 Nov;9(11):4-14
pubmed: 19882444
Health Aff (Millwood). 2020 Jun;39(6):936-941
pubmed: 32271627
Nat Med. 2020 May;26(5):672-675
pubmed: 32296168
Nat Med. 2020 Jul;26(7):1037-1040
pubmed: 32393804
Emerg Infect Dis. 2010 Feb;16(2):212-8
pubmed: 20113549
Public Health. 2020 Oct;187:41-52
pubmed: 32898760
Euro Surveill. 2020 Mar;25(10):
pubmed: 32183930