UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

Automated and partly automated contact tracing: a systematic review to inform the control of COVID-19

Braithwaite, I; Callender, T; Bullock, M; Aldridge, RW; (2020) Automated and partly automated contact tracing: a systematic review to inform the control of COVID-19. The Lancet Digital Health 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30184-9. (In press). Green open access

[thumbnail of 1-s2.0-S2589750020301849-main.pdf]
Preview
Text
1-s2.0-S2589750020301849-main.pdf - Published Version

Download (757kB) | Preview

Abstract

Evidence for the use of automated or partly automated contact-tracing tools to contain severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is scarce. We did a systematic review of automated or partly automated contact tracing. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, OVID Global Health, EBSCO Medical COVID Information Portal, Cochrane Library, medRxiv, bioRxiv, arXiv, and Google Advanced for articles relevant to COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome, Middle East respiratory syndrome, influenza, or Ebola virus, published from Jan 1, 2000, to April 14, 2020. We also included studies identified through professional networks up to April 30, 2020. We reviewed all full-text manuscripts. Primary outcomes were the number or proportion of contacts (or subsequent cases) identified. Secondary outcomes were indicators of outbreak control, uptake, resource use, cost-effectiveness, and lessons learnt. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020179822). Of the 4036 studies identified, 110 full-text studies were reviewed and 15 studies were included in the final analysis and quality assessment. No empirical evidence of the effectiveness of automated contact tracing (regarding contacts identified or transmission reduction) was identified. Four of seven included modelling studies that suggested that controlling COVID-19 requires a high population uptake of automated contact-tracing apps (estimates from 56% to 95%), typically alongside other control measures. Studies of partly automated contact tracing generally reported more complete contact identification and follow-up compared with manual systems. Automated contact tracing could potentially reduce transmission with sufficient population uptake. However, concerns regarding privacy and equity should be considered. Well designed prospective studies are needed given gaps in evidence of effectiveness, and to investigate the integration and relative effects of manual and automated systems. Large-scale manual contact tracing is therefore still key in most contexts.

Type: Article
Title: Automated and partly automated contact tracing: a systematic review to inform the control of COVID-19
Location: England
Open access status: An open access version is available from UCL Discovery
DOI: 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30184-9
Publisher version: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30184-9
Language: English
Additional information: Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
UCL classification: UCL
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Medicine
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Div of Medicine > Respiratory Medicine
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Institute of Health Informatics
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10110603
Downloads since deposit
43Downloads
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item