Combining fine-scale social contact data with epidemic modelling reveals interactions between contact tracing, quarantine, testing and physical distancing for controlling COVID-19

  1. Josh A. Firth
  2. Joel Hellewell
  3. Petra Klepac
  4. Stephen Kissler
  5. CMMID COVID-19 working group
  6. Adam J. Kucharski
  7. Lewis G. Spurgin

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Case isolation and contact tracing can contribute to the control of COVID-19 outbreaks 1,2 . However, it remains unclear how real-world networks could influence the effectiveness and efficiency of such approaches. To address this issue, we simulated control strategies for SARS-CoV-2 in a real-world social network generated from high resolution GPS data 3,4 . We found that tracing contacts-of-contacts reduced the size of simulated outbreaks more than tracing of only contacts, but resulted in almost half of the local population being quarantined at a single point in time. Testing and releasing non-infectious individuals led to increases in outbreak size, suggesting that contact tracing and quarantine may be most effective when it acts as a ‘local lockdown’ when contact rates are high. Finally, we estimated that combining physical distancing with contact tracing could enable epidemic control while reducing the number of quarantined individuals. Our approach highlights the importance of network structure and social dynamics in evaluating the potential impact of SARS-CoV-2 control.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.26.20113720v2 on medRxiv
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.26.20113720: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.26.20113720v1 on medRxiv