IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcom/v12y2021i1d10.1038_s41467-021-22082-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stochastic sampling effects favor manual over digital contact tracing

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Mancastroppa

    (Università degli Studi di Parma, Parco Area delle Scienze
    Gruppo Collegato di Parma, Parco Area delle Scienze)

  • Claudio Castellano

    (Istituto dei Sistemi Complessi (ISC-CNR))

  • Alessandro Vezzani

    (Università degli Studi di Parma, Parco Area delle Scienze
    Istituto dei Materiali per l’Elettronica ed il Magnetismo (IMEM-CNR), Parco Area delle Scienze)

  • Raffaella Burioni

    (Università degli Studi di Parma, Parco Area delle Scienze
    Gruppo Collegato di Parma, Parco Area delle Scienze)

Abstract

Isolation of symptomatic individuals, tracing and testing of their nonsymptomatic contacts are fundamental strategies for mitigating the current COVID-19 pandemic. The breaking of contagion chains relies on two complementary strategies: manual reconstruction of contacts based on interviews and a digital (app-based) privacy-preserving contact tracing. We compare their effectiveness using model parameters tailored to describe SARS-CoV-2 diffusion within the activity-driven model, a general empirically validated framework for network dynamics. We show that, even for equal probability of tracing a contact, manual tracing robustly performs better than the digital protocol, also taking into account the intrinsic delay and limited scalability of the manual procedure. This result is explained in terms of the stochastic sampling occurring during the case-by-case manual reconstruction of contacts, contrasted with the intrinsically prearranged nature of digital tracing, determined by the decision to adopt the app or not by each individual. The better performance of manual tracing is enhanced by heterogeneity in agent behavior: superspreaders not adopting the app are completely invisible to digital contact tracing, while they can be easily traced manually, due to their multiple contacts. We show that this intrinsic difference makes the manual procedure dominant in realistic hybrid protocols.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Mancastroppa & Claudio Castellano & Alessandro Vezzani & Raffaella Burioni, 2021. "Stochastic sampling effects favor manual over digital contact tracing," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:12:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-021-22082-7
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-22082-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22082-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41467-021-22082-7?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Caspar Geenen & Joren Raymenants & Sarah Gorissen & Jonathan Thibaut & Jodie McVernon & Natalie Lorent & Emmanuel André, 2023. "Individual level analysis of digital proximity tracing for COVID-19 in Belgium highlights major bottlenecks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.

    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:nat:natcom:v:12:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-021-22082-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    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.