Effectiveness of contact tracing and quarantine on reducing COVID-19 transmission: a retrospective cohort study
Contact tracing and quarantine are common measures used in the management of infectious disease outbreaks. However, few studies have measured their impact on the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of those measures on reducing transmission of severe acute...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Public health (London) 2020-12, Vol.189, p.54-59 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 59 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 54 |
| container_title | Public health (London) |
| container_volume | 189 |
| creator | Malheiro, R. Figueiredo, A.L. Magalhães, J.P. Teixeira, P. Moita, I. Moutinho, M.C. Mansilha, R.B. Gonçalves, L.M. Ferreira, E. |
| description | Contact tracing and quarantine are common measures used in the management of infectious disease outbreaks. However, few studies have measured their impact on the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of those measures on reducing transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in a community setting.
The study design is a retrospective cohort study.
A retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 cases notified in Eastern Porto from March 1st to April 30th, 2020 was performed. Intervention and control cohorts were defined based on whether cases were subjected to contact tracing and quarantine measures before the laboratory confirmation of disease. The number of secondary cases per index case and the proportion of cases with subsequent secondary cases were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included the time from symptom onset to specimen collection and the number of close contacts. The analysis was stratified according to whether national lockdown measures had already been implemented.
The intervention and control cohorts comprised 98 and 453 cases, respectively. No differences were observed concerning primary outcomes. The intervention group had a shorter time between symptom onset and specimen collection (median: 3 days, interquartile range [IQR]: 1–6, vs. median: 5 days, IQR: 2–7, P-value = 0.004) and fewer close contacts (median: 0, IQR: 0–2, vs. median: 2, IQR: 1–4, P-value |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.09.012 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7522642</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0033350620304194</els_id><sourcerecordid>2458722317</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-35d601d1a1e60cf4eda382a4e49b4d1d368589087113ed12a6eb2a50ca5f7d03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUFvEzEQhS0EoqHwBziglbhw2WVsr71ehJBQKFCpUi8VV8uxZxtHiZ3a3kj99zikVMCB0xzmm6c37xHymkJHgcr3m24_r7FjwKCDsQPKnpAF7QfZCknlU7IA4LzlAuQZeZHzBgDYwMVzcsY5lQBKLUi8mCa0xR8wYM5NnBobQzG2NCUZ68NtY4Jr7maTTCg-YBNDk9DNv1bL6x-XX1o6HtmQdz5nH8OHxlSipJj3J-GquI6pNLnM7v4leTaZbcZXD_Oc3Hy9uFl-b6-uv10uP1-1tle8VNNOAnXUUJRgpx6d4YqZHvtx1TvquFRCjaAGSjk6yozEFTMCrBHT4ICfk08n2f282qGzGKrFrd4nvzPpXkfj9d-b4Nf6Nh70IBiTPasC7x4EUrybMRdd37O43ZqAcc6a9UINjHE6VPTtP-gmzinU7yqlpJKCqbFS7ETZmkxOOD2aoaCPdeqNPtapj3VqGHWtsx69-fONx5Pf_VXg4wnAmuXBY9LZegwWnU81fe2i_5_-T5X-suE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2486865289</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effectiveness of contact tracing and quarantine on reducing COVID-19 transmission: a retrospective cohort study</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Malheiro, R. ; Figueiredo, A.L. ; Magalhães, J.P. ; Teixeira, P. ; Moita, I. ; Moutinho, M.C. ; Mansilha, R.B. ; Gonçalves, L.M. ; Ferreira, E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Malheiro, R. ; Figueiredo, A.L. ; Magalhães, J.P. ; Teixeira, P. ; Moita, I. ; Moutinho, M.C. ; Mansilha, R.B. ; Gonçalves, L.M. ; Ferreira, E.</creatorcontrib><description>Contact tracing and quarantine are common measures used in the management of infectious disease outbreaks. However, few studies have measured their impact on the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of those measures on reducing transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in a community setting.
The study design is a retrospective cohort study.
A retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 cases notified in Eastern Porto from March 1st to April 30th, 2020 was performed. Intervention and control cohorts were defined based on whether cases were subjected to contact tracing and quarantine measures before the laboratory confirmation of disease. The number of secondary cases per index case and the proportion of cases with subsequent secondary cases were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included the time from symptom onset to specimen collection and the number of close contacts. The analysis was stratified according to whether national lockdown measures had already been implemented.
The intervention and control cohorts comprised 98 and 453 cases, respectively. No differences were observed concerning primary outcomes. The intervention group had a shorter time between symptom onset and specimen collection (median: 3 days, interquartile range [IQR]: 1–6, vs. median: 5 days, IQR: 2–7, P-value = 0.004) and fewer close contacts (median: 0, IQR: 0–2, vs. median: 2, IQR: 1–4, P-value<0.001). The stratified analysis returned similar results.
Local public health measures were effective in reducing the time between symptom onset and laboratory diagnosis and the number of close contacts per case. No effect was apparent on secondary case figures, suggesting that further measures may be required.
•No evidence was found that contact tracing reduces the number of secondary cases.•Contact tracing and quarantine allow for a faster diagnosis of symptomatic contacts.•Local measures are effective at reducing the number of high-risk contacts.•Household members of COVID-19 cases are a particularly susceptible population.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0033-3506</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1476-5616</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.09.012</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33160088</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Asymptomatic Infections - epidemiology ; Clinical Laboratory Techniques ; Cohort analysis ; Communicable Disease Control - methods ; Contact tracing ; Contact Tracing - methods ; Coronaviruses ; COVID-19 ; COVID-19 - transmission ; Disease control ; Disease Outbreaks - prevention & control ; Disease transmission ; Disease Transmission, Infectious - prevention & control ; Effectiveness ; Epidemiology ; Female ; Humans ; Infectious diseases ; Intervention ; Laboratories ; Male ; Medical diagnosis ; Middle Aged ; Original Research ; Pandemics ; Patient Isolation ; Portugal - epidemiology ; Public Health ; Quarantine ; Respiratory diseases ; Retrospective Studies ; SARS-CoV-2 ; Severe acute respiratory syndrome ; Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 ; Viral diseases</subject><ispartof>Public health (London), 2020-12, Vol.189, p.54-59</ispartof><rights>2020 The Royal Society for Public Health</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Dec 2020</rights><rights>2020 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 2020 The Royal Society for Public Health</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-35d601d1a1e60cf4eda382a4e49b4d1d368589087113ed12a6eb2a50ca5f7d03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-35d601d1a1e60cf4eda382a4e49b4d1d368589087113ed12a6eb2a50ca5f7d03</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5473-7233</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033350620304194$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,3537,27901,27902,30976,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33160088$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Malheiro, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Figueiredo, A.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magalhães, J.P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teixeira, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moita, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moutinho, M.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mansilha, R.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gonçalves, L.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferreira, E.</creatorcontrib><title>Effectiveness of contact tracing and quarantine on reducing COVID-19 transmission: a retrospective cohort study</title><title>Public health (London)</title><addtitle>Public Health</addtitle><description>Contact tracing and quarantine are common measures used in the management of infectious disease outbreaks. However, few studies have measured their impact on the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of those measures on reducing transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in a community setting.
The study design is a retrospective cohort study.
A retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 cases notified in Eastern Porto from March 1st to April 30th, 2020 was performed. Intervention and control cohorts were defined based on whether cases were subjected to contact tracing and quarantine measures before the laboratory confirmation of disease. The number of secondary cases per index case and the proportion of cases with subsequent secondary cases were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included the time from symptom onset to specimen collection and the number of close contacts. The analysis was stratified according to whether national lockdown measures had already been implemented.
The intervention and control cohorts comprised 98 and 453 cases, respectively. No differences were observed concerning primary outcomes. The intervention group had a shorter time between symptom onset and specimen collection (median: 3 days, interquartile range [IQR]: 1–6, vs. median: 5 days, IQR: 2–7, P-value = 0.004) and fewer close contacts (median: 0, IQR: 0–2, vs. median: 2, IQR: 1–4, P-value<0.001). The stratified analysis returned similar results.
Local public health measures were effective in reducing the time between symptom onset and laboratory diagnosis and the number of close contacts per case. No effect was apparent on secondary case figures, suggesting that further measures may be required.
•No evidence was found that contact tracing reduces the number of secondary cases.•Contact tracing and quarantine allow for a faster diagnosis of symptomatic contacts.•Local measures are effective at reducing the number of high-risk contacts.•Household members of COVID-19 cases are a particularly susceptible population.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Asymptomatic Infections - epidemiology</subject><subject>Clinical Laboratory Techniques</subject><subject>Cohort analysis</subject><subject>Communicable Disease Control - methods</subject><subject>Contact tracing</subject><subject>Contact Tracing - methods</subject><subject>Coronaviruses</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>COVID-19 - transmission</subject><subject>Disease control</subject><subject>Disease Outbreaks - prevention & control</subject><subject>Disease transmission</subject><subject>Disease Transmission, Infectious - prevention & control</subject><subject>Effectiveness</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infectious diseases</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical diagnosis</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Pandemics</subject><subject>Patient Isolation</subject><subject>Portugal - epidemiology</subject><subject>Public Health</subject><subject>Quarantine</subject><subject>Respiratory diseases</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>SARS-CoV-2</subject><subject>Severe acute respiratory syndrome</subject><subject>Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2</subject><subject>Viral diseases</subject><issn>0033-3506</issn><issn>1476-5616</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kUFvEzEQhS0EoqHwBziglbhw2WVsr71ehJBQKFCpUi8VV8uxZxtHiZ3a3kj99zikVMCB0xzmm6c37xHymkJHgcr3m24_r7FjwKCDsQPKnpAF7QfZCknlU7IA4LzlAuQZeZHzBgDYwMVzcsY5lQBKLUi8mCa0xR8wYM5NnBobQzG2NCUZ68NtY4Jr7maTTCg-YBNDk9DNv1bL6x-XX1o6HtmQdz5nH8OHxlSipJj3J-GquI6pNLnM7v4leTaZbcZXD_Oc3Hy9uFl-b6-uv10uP1-1tle8VNNOAnXUUJRgpx6d4YqZHvtx1TvquFRCjaAGSjk6yozEFTMCrBHT4ICfk08n2f282qGzGKrFrd4nvzPpXkfj9d-b4Nf6Nh70IBiTPasC7x4EUrybMRdd37O43ZqAcc6a9UINjHE6VPTtP-gmzinU7yqlpJKCqbFS7ETZmkxOOD2aoaCPdeqNPtapj3VqGHWtsx69-fONx5Pf_VXg4wnAmuXBY9LZegwWnU81fe2i_5_-T5X-suE</recordid><startdate>20201201</startdate><enddate>20201201</enddate><creator>Malheiro, R.</creator><creator>Figueiredo, A.L.</creator><creator>Magalhães, J.P.</creator><creator>Teixeira, P.</creator><creator>Moita, I.</creator><creator>Moutinho, M.C.</creator><creator>Mansilha, R.B.</creator><creator>Gonçalves, L.M.</creator><creator>Ferreira, E.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><general>The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5473-7233</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20201201</creationdate><title>Effectiveness of contact tracing and quarantine on reducing COVID-19 transmission: a retrospective cohort study</title><author>Malheiro, R. ; Figueiredo, A.L. ; Magalhães, J.P. ; Teixeira, P. ; Moita, I. ; Moutinho, M.C. ; Mansilha, R.B. ; Gonçalves, L.M. ; Ferreira, E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-35d601d1a1e60cf4eda382a4e49b4d1d368589087113ed12a6eb2a50ca5f7d03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Asymptomatic Infections - epidemiology</topic><topic>Clinical Laboratory Techniques</topic><topic>Cohort analysis</topic><topic>Communicable Disease Control - methods</topic><topic>Contact tracing</topic><topic>Contact Tracing - methods</topic><topic>Coronaviruses</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>COVID-19 - transmission</topic><topic>Disease control</topic><topic>Disease Outbreaks - prevention & control</topic><topic>Disease transmission</topic><topic>Disease Transmission, Infectious - prevention & control</topic><topic>Effectiveness</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infectious diseases</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical diagnosis</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Pandemics</topic><topic>Patient Isolation</topic><topic>Portugal - epidemiology</topic><topic>Public Health</topic><topic>Quarantine</topic><topic>Respiratory diseases</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>SARS-CoV-2</topic><topic>Severe acute respiratory syndrome</topic><topic>Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2</topic><topic>Viral diseases</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Malheiro, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Figueiredo, A.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magalhães, J.P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teixeira, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moita, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moutinho, M.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mansilha, R.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gonçalves, L.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ferreira, E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Public health (London)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Malheiro, R.</au><au>Figueiredo, A.L.</au><au>Magalhães, J.P.</au><au>Teixeira, P.</au><au>Moita, I.</au><au>Moutinho, M.C.</au><au>Mansilha, R.B.</au><au>Gonçalves, L.M.</au><au>Ferreira, E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effectiveness of contact tracing and quarantine on reducing COVID-19 transmission: a retrospective cohort study</atitle><jtitle>Public health (London)</jtitle><addtitle>Public Health</addtitle><date>2020-12-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>189</volume><spage>54</spage><epage>59</epage><pages>54-59</pages><issn>0033-3506</issn><eissn>1476-5616</eissn><abstract>Contact tracing and quarantine are common measures used in the management of infectious disease outbreaks. However, few studies have measured their impact on the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of those measures on reducing transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in a community setting.
The study design is a retrospective cohort study.
A retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 cases notified in Eastern Porto from March 1st to April 30th, 2020 was performed. Intervention and control cohorts were defined based on whether cases were subjected to contact tracing and quarantine measures before the laboratory confirmation of disease. The number of secondary cases per index case and the proportion of cases with subsequent secondary cases were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included the time from symptom onset to specimen collection and the number of close contacts. The analysis was stratified according to whether national lockdown measures had already been implemented.
The intervention and control cohorts comprised 98 and 453 cases, respectively. No differences were observed concerning primary outcomes. The intervention group had a shorter time between symptom onset and specimen collection (median: 3 days, interquartile range [IQR]: 1–6, vs. median: 5 days, IQR: 2–7, P-value = 0.004) and fewer close contacts (median: 0, IQR: 0–2, vs. median: 2, IQR: 1–4, P-value<0.001). The stratified analysis returned similar results.
Local public health measures were effective in reducing the time between symptom onset and laboratory diagnosis and the number of close contacts per case. No effect was apparent on secondary case figures, suggesting that further measures may be required.
•No evidence was found that contact tracing reduces the number of secondary cases.•Contact tracing and quarantine allow for a faster diagnosis of symptomatic contacts.•Local measures are effective at reducing the number of high-risk contacts.•Household members of COVID-19 cases are a particularly susceptible population.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>33160088</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.puhe.2020.09.012</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5473-7233</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0033-3506 |
| ispartof | Public health (London), 2020-12, Vol.189, p.54-59 |
| issn | 0033-3506 1476-5616 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7522642 |
| source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Adult Aged Asymptomatic Infections - epidemiology Clinical Laboratory Techniques Cohort analysis Communicable Disease Control - methods Contact tracing Contact Tracing - methods Coronaviruses COVID-19 COVID-19 - transmission Disease control Disease Outbreaks - prevention & control Disease transmission Disease Transmission, Infectious - prevention & control Effectiveness Epidemiology Female Humans Infectious diseases Intervention Laboratories Male Medical diagnosis Middle Aged Original Research Pandemics Patient Isolation Portugal - epidemiology Public Health Quarantine Respiratory diseases Retrospective Studies SARS-CoV-2 Severe acute respiratory syndrome Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 Viral diseases |
| title | Effectiveness of contact tracing and quarantine on reducing COVID-19 transmission: a retrospective cohort study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T02%3A45%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effectiveness%20of%20contact%20tracing%20and%20quarantine%20on%20reducing%20COVID-19%20transmission:%20a%20retrospective%20cohort%20study&rft.jtitle=Public%20health%20(London)&rft.au=Malheiro,%20R.&rft.date=2020-12-01&rft.volume=189&rft.spage=54&rft.epage=59&rft.pages=54-59&rft.issn=0033-3506&rft.eissn=1476-5616&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.09.012&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2458722317%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2486865289&rft_id=info:pmid/33160088&rft_els_id=S0033350620304194&rfr_iscdi=true |