IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0264433.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contact tracing indicators for COVID-19: Rapid scoping review and conceptual framework

Author

Listed:
  • Florian Vogt
  • Karishma Krishna Kurup
  • Paul Mussleman
  • Caroline Habrun
  • Madeleine Crowe
  • Alexandra Woodward
  • Giovanna Jaramillo-Gutierrez
  • John Kaldor
  • Sirenda Vong
  • Victor del Rio Vilas

Abstract

Background: Contact tracing is one of the key interventions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic but its implementation varies widely across countries. There is little guidance on how to monitor contact tracing performance, and no systematic overview of indicators to assess contact tracing systems or conceptual framework for such indicators exists to date. Methods: We conducted a rapid scoping review using a systematic literature search strategy in the peer-reviewed and grey literature as well as open source online documents. We developed a conceptual framework to map indicators by type (input, process, output, outcome, impact) and thematic area (human resources, financial resources, case investigation, contact identification, contact testing, contact follow up, case isolation, contact quarantine, transmission chain interruption, incidence reduction). Results: We identified a total of 153 contact tracing indicators from 1,555 peer-reviewed studies, 894 studies from grey literature sources, and 15 sources from internet searches. Two-thirds of indicators were process indicators (102; 67%), while 48 (31%) indicators were output indicators. Only three (2%) indicators were input indicators. Indicators covered seven out of ten conceptualized thematic areas, with more than half being related to either case investigation (37; 24%) or contact identification (44; 29%). There were no indicators for the input area “financial resources”, the outcome area “transmission chain interruption”, and the impact area “incidence reduction”. Conclusions: Almost all identified indicators were either process or output indicators focusing on case investigation, contact identification, case isolation or contact quarantine. We identified important gaps in input, outcome and impact indicators, which constrains evidence-based assessment of contact tracing systems. A universally agreed set of indicators is needed to allow for cross-system comparisons and to improve the performance of contact tracing systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Florian Vogt & Karishma Krishna Kurup & Paul Mussleman & Caroline Habrun & Madeleine Crowe & Alexandra Woodward & Giovanna Jaramillo-Gutierrez & John Kaldor & Sirenda Vong & Victor del Rio Vilas, 2022. "Contact tracing indicators for COVID-19: Rapid scoping review and conceptual framework," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-9, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0264433
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0264433
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0264433
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0264433&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0264433?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0264433. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.