Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the crucial role of testing in mitigating disease transmission. This study comprehensively evaluates the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of various testing strategies, including daily screening, symptom-based testing, and contact-based testing, using assays such as RT-PCR, RT-LAMP, and antigen tests. Employing stochastic modeling on a contact network, we assessed the impact of these strategies on outbreak control, using COVID-19 as a case study. Our findings demonstrate that daily screening, particularly with RT-PCR and RT-LAMP, significantly reduces transmission risks but incurs higher costs. In contrast, symptom-based testing offers a more cost-effective alternative, albeit with lower efficacy in mitigating outbreaks. Notably, testing turnaround time emerges as a more critical factor than assay sensitivity in containing outbreaks. Moreover, combining symptom-based testing with contact tracing further reduces outbreak probability and scale. To provide a comprehensive analysis, we also explored the application of these strategies in scenarios where a portion of the population has acquired immunity. Our results suggest that testing all symptomatic individuals is the most effective and cost-efficient approach in the later stages of an epidemic. These findings provide valuable insights for optimizing testing strategies to tackle current and future infectious disease outbreaks effectively and efficiently. By adapting strategies based on the stage of the epidemic, population immunity, and available resources, public health authorities can design targeted interventions to protect communities while managing limited resources.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the Center of Excellence on Medical Biotechnology (CEMB), The Science, Research and Innovation Promotion and Utilization Division, The Office of the Permanent Secretary Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Innovation, Thailand.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos