MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411227069 · doi:10.33540/2932

Untapped potential: Opportunities and challenges for self-led contact tracing during outbreaks of communicable diseases

2025· dissertation· en· W4411227069 on OpenAlexaff
Yannick B Helms

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCOVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContact tracingOutbreakTracingBusinessMedicinePolitical scienceComputer scienceVirologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Infectious disease (medical specialty)PathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Outbreaks of communicable diseases such as COVID-19 can significantly threaten individual wellbeing and societal functioning. To contain such outbreaks, public health services (PHS) implement contact tracing (CT). In this process, a public health professional (PHP) interviews an infected individual (‘case’) to identify people they were in contact with during their infectious period (‘contacts’) and informs them about the necessary measures to prevent further transmission of the pathogen. However, CT can be challenging during large outbreaks due to the high numbers of cases and contacts, time and resource demands, and limited cooperation. In this thesis, we investigated whether and how CT can be improved by more actively involving cases and contacts in tasks typically performed by PHPs, supported by digital tools. We refer to this approach as ‘self-led’ CT. In part one of this thesis, we examined the use of web-based respondent-driven sampling (webRDS) in public health. A scoping review showed that webRDS has been successfully used to recruit participants for research on various topics, deliver health interventions, and support case finding. Peer recruitment can be stimulated by offering adequate incentives, conducting formative research into recruitment barriers, and thoroughly motivating ‘seeds’ to initiate recruitment. In part two, we explored PHPs’ perspectives on self-led CT through interviews and surveys. PHPs were generally positive, anticipating that self-led CT could make the process more efficient and enable more autonomous participation. However, they also expressed concerns about losing oversight and the ability to support cases and contacts. PHPs considered self-led CT appropriate when dealing with digitally skilled and motivated individuals, and during outbreaks involving relatively many cases and contacts. They considered self-led CT less suitable in high-risk or complex situations. PHPs emphasized that self-led CT should complement—not replace—provider-initiated CT and recommended maintaining options for personal support. In part three, we investigated citizens’ perspectives on self-led CT during the COVID-19 pandemic using interviews and surveys. Citizens generally indicated to be willing to participate in self-led CT. Their willingness depended on various factors, including previous experiences with CT, sense of responsibility, self-efficacy, perceived impact, trust in digital tools, and privacy concerns. Citizens recommended enabling early participation, minimizing data collection, and offering both autonomous and supported options within the CT process. In part four, we conducted an experimental online questionnaire study to compare different approaches to support citizens in recalling and reporting their contacts. We found that using context-specific recall cues and asking participants to list contacts separately for different situations increased the number of reported contacts, but also raised the risk of participant dropout. Furthermore, not all additionally elicited contacts may equally contribute to CT effectiveness. Our findings suggest that self-led CT may be less feasible for individuals with many or high-risk contacts. In the final part of the thesis, we discuss limitations, opportunities for future research, and propose a framework for integrating self-led and provider-initiated CT to maximize benefits while addressing potential challenges.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.117
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.143
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1170.143
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0090.013
Scholarly communication0.0210.025
Open science0.0060.021
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCOVID-19 Digital Contact TracingFrench-language works237,207