Paper detail

The role of regular asymptomatic testing in reducing the impact of a COVID-19 wave

Testing for infection with SARS-CoV-2 is an important intervention in reducing onwards transmission of COVID-19, particularly when combined with the isolation and contact-tracing of positive cases. Many countries with the capacity to do so have made use of lab-processed Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) testing targeted at individuals with symptoms and the contacts of confirmed cases. Alternatively, Lateral Flow Tests (LFTs) are able to deliver a result quickly, without lab-processing and at a relatively low cost. Their adoption can support regular mass asymptomatic testing, allowing earlier detection of infection and isolation of infectious individuals. In this paper we extend and apply the agent-based epidemic modelling framework Covasim to explore the impact of regular asymptomatic testing on the peak and total number of infections in an emerging COVID-19 wave. We explore testing with LFTs at different frequency levels within a population with high levels of immunity and with background symptomatic PCR testing, case isolation and contact tracing for testing. The effectiveness of regular asymptomatic testing was compared with `lockdown' interventions seeking to reduce the number of non-household contacts across the whole population through measures such as mandating working from home and restrictions on gatherings. Since regular asymptomatic testing requires only those with a positive result to reduce contact, while lockdown measures require the whole population to reduce contact, any policy decision that seeks to trade off harms from infection against other harms will not automatically favour one over the other. Our results demonstrate that, where such a trade off is being made, at moderate rates of early exponential growth regular asymptomatic testing has the potential to achieve significant infection control without the wider harms associated with additional lockdown measures.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.