Individual level analysis of digital proximity tracing for COVID-19 in Belgium highlights major bottlenecks

Caspar Geenen (), Joren Raymenants, Sarah Gorissen, Jonathan Thibaut, Jodie McVernon, Natalie Lorent and Emmanuel André
Additional contact information
Caspar Geenen: KU Leuven, Dept of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, Laboratory of Clinical Microbiology
Joren Raymenants: KU Leuven, Dept of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, Laboratory of Clinical Microbiology
Sarah Gorissen: KU Leuven, Dept of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, Laboratory of Clinical Microbiology
Jonathan Thibaut: KU Leuven, Dept of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, Laboratory of Clinical Microbiology
Jodie McVernon: The University of Melbourne at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity
Natalie Lorent: University Hospitals Leuven, Respiratory Diseases
Emmanuel André: KU Leuven, Dept of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, Laboratory of Clinical Microbiology

Nature Communications, 2023, vol. 14, issue 1, 1-12

Abstract: Abstract To complement labour-intensive conventional contact tracing, digital proximity tracing was implemented widely during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the privacy-centred design of the dominant Google-Apple exposure notification framework has hindered assessment of its effectiveness. Between October 2021 and January 2022, we systematically collected app use and notification receipt data within a test and trace programme targeting around 50,000 university students in Leuven, Belgium. Due to low success rates in each studied step of the digital notification cascade, only 4.3% of exposed contacts (CI: 2.8-6.1%) received such notifications, resulting in 10 times more cases detected through conventional contact tracing. Moreover, the infection risk of digitally traced contacts (5.0%; CI: 3.0–7.7%) was lower than that of conventionally traced non-app users (9.8%; CI: 8.8-10.7%; p = 0.002). Contrary to common perception as near instantaneous, there was a 1.2-day delay (CI: 0.6–2.2) between case PCR result and digital contact notification. These results highlight major limitations of a digital proximity tracing system based on the dominant framework.

Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-42518-6 Abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:natcom:v:14:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-023-42518-6

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/ncomms/

DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-42518-6

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Communications is currently edited by Nathalie Le Bot, Enda Bergin and Fiona Gillespie

More articles in Nature Communications from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().