The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Automated and partly automated contact tracing: a systematic review to inform the control of COVID-19
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China
Huang, C., Wang, Y., Li, X., Ren, L., Zhao, J., Hu, Y., Zhang, L., Fan, G., Xu, J., Gu, X., et al. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30183-5 · Cited by 48,884
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
The Psychological Impact of Quarantine and How to Reduce It: Rapid Review of the Evidence
Brooks, S. K., Webster, R. K., Smith, L. E., Woodland, L., Wessely, S., Greenberg, N., & Rubin, G. J. (2020) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3532534 · Cited by 16,394
The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence
Brooks, S. K., Webster, R. K., Smith, L. E., Woodland, L., Wessely, S., Greenberg, N., & Rubin, G. J. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30460-8 · Cited by 16,378
Lauer, S. A., Grantz, K. H., Bi, Q., Jones, F. K., Zheng, Q., Meredith, H. R., Azman, A. S., Reich, N. G., & Lessler, J. (2020) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m20-0504 · Cited by 5,970
A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker)
Hale, T., Angrist, N., Goldszmidt, R., Kira, B., Petherick, A., Phillips, T., Webster, S., Cameron-Blake, E., Hallas, L., Majumdar, S., et al. (2021) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01079-8 · Cited by 4,578
Presumed Asymptomatic Carrier Transmission of COVID-19
Bai, Y., Yao, L., Wei, T., Tian, F., Jin, D.-Y., Chen, L., & Wang, M. (2020) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2020.2565 · Cited by 4,498
The reproductive number of COVID-19 is higher compared to SARS coronavirus
Liu, Y., Gayle, A. A., Wilder-Smith, A., & Rocklöv, J. (2020) · Journal of Travel Medicine · doi:10.1093/jtm/taaa021 · Cited by 3,192
Cited by
The timing of COVID-19 transmission
Ferretti, L., Ledda, A., Wymant, C., Zhao, L., Ledda, V., Abeler-Dörner, L., Kendall, M., Nurtay, A., Cheng, H.-Y., Ng, T.-C., et al. (2020) · doi:10.1101/2020.09.04.20188516 · Cited by 112
Tomczyk, S., Barth, S., Schmidt, S., & Muehlan, H. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/25447 · Cited by 69
Effectiveness of contact tracing apps for SARS-CoV-2: a rapid systematic review
Jenniskens, K., Bootsma, M. C. J., Damen, J. A. A. G., Oerbekke, M. S., Vernooij, R. W. M., Spijker, R., Moons, K. G. M., Kretzschmar, M. E. E., & Hooft, L. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050519 · Cited by 40
Geopolitics, jurisdiction and surveillance
Mann, M., & Daly, A. (2020) · Internet Policy Review · doi:10.14763/2020.3.1501 · Cited by 38
Upping uptake of COVID contact tracing apps
Toussaert, S. (2021) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01048-1 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Braithwaite, I., Callender, T., Bullock, M., & Aldridge, R. W.
- Venue
- The Lancet Digital Health
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-11
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- e607-e621
- ISSN
- 2589-7500 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3049296443
- Cited by
- 325
- References
- 55
- FWCI
- 14.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Automated and partly automated contact tracing: a systematic review to inform the control of COVID-19. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s2589-7500(20)30184-9
- The paper
- Braithwaite, I., Callender, T., Bullock, M., & Aldridge, R. W. (2020). Automated and partly automated contact tracing: a systematic review to inform the control of COVID-19. The Lancet Digital Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2589-7500(20)30184-9
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.