ABSTRACT
Background Digital proximity tracing applications were rolled out early in the COVID-19 pandemic in many countries to complement conventional contact tracing. Empirical evidence about their benefits for pandemic response remains scarce. We evaluated the effectiveness and usefulness of ‘COVIDSafe’, Australia’s national smartphone-based proximity tracing application for COVID-19.
Methods In this prospective study, conducted in New South Wales, Australia between May and November 2020, we calculated the positive predictive value and sensitivity of COVIDSafe, its additional contact yield, and the number of averted public exposure events. Semi-structured interviews with public health staff were conducted to assess the application’s usefulness.
Results There were 619 confirmed COVID-19 cases and over 25,300 close contacts during the study period. COVIDSafe was used by 137 (22%) cases and detected 79 (0·3%) close contacts. It had a positive predictive value of 39% and a sensitivity of 15%, and detected 17 (0·07%) additional close contacts that were not identified by conventional contact tracing. The application generated a substantial additional workload for public health staff and was not considered useful.
Conclusions COVIDSafe was not sufficiently effective to make a meaningful contribution to the COVID-19 response in Australia’s most populous state over a 6-month period. This contrasts optimistic projections from modelling studies about the added value of digitally supported contact tracing. We found no evidence that it adds value to conventional contact tracing, and recommend that their implementation should always include comprehensive effectiveness evaluations.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia) and the New South Wales Ministry of Health (Australia) was used to carry out this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
We obtained ethics approval from the University of New South Wales Human Research Ethics Committee
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request.
