@article {Fetzer2020.12.10.20247080, author = {Thiemo Fetzer and Thomas Graeber}, title = {Does Contact Tracing Work? Quasi-Experimental Evidence from an Excel Error in England}, elocation-id = {2020.12.10.20247080}, year = {2020}, doi = {10.1101/2020.12.10.20247080}, publisher = {Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press}, abstract = {Contact tracing has been a central pillar of the public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, contact tracing measures face substantive challenges in practice and well-identified evidence about their effectiveness remains scarce. This paper exploits quasi-random variation in COVID-19 contact tracing. Between September 25 and October 2, 2020, a total of 15,841 COVID-19 cases in England (around 15 to 20\% of all cases) were not immediately referred to the contact tracing system due to a data processing error. Case information had been truncated from an Excel spreadsheet due to a row limit, which was discovered on October 3. There is substantial variation in the degree to which different parts of England areas were exposed {\textendash} by chance {\textendash} to delayed referrals of COVID-19 cases to to the contact tracing system. We show that more affected areas subsequently experienced a drastic rise in new COVID-19 infections and deaths alongside an increase in the positivity rate and the number of test performed, as well as a decline in the performance of the contact tracing system. Conservative estimates suggest that the failure of timely contact tracing due to the data glitch is associated with more than 125,000 additional infections and over 1,500 additional COVID-19-related deaths. Our findings provide strong quasi-experimental evidence for the effectiveness of contact tracing.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work did not receive any external research funding.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The research is unregulated.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as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).YesI 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.YesAll data and code used to produce the results presented in the paper will be made available upon publication of the manuscript.}, URL = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/15/2020.12.10.20247080}, eprint = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/15/2020.12.10.20247080.full.pdf}, journal = {medRxiv} }