Table 2.

Simulated PDRs and their advantages and disadvantages for CT.

PDR	Advantages	Disadvantages
0.2 m	• Lowest risk of detecting false positives	• Almost no positive impact on maximum share of infectious individuals, or share of susceptible individuals at the epidemic end
1 m	• Noticeable decrease of the maximum share of infectious individuals at high adoption rates • Relatively little quarantine time required • Little share of susceptible individuals in quarantine	• Relatively low share of susceptible individuals at the end of the epidemic, even at 100% adoption rate • Long epidemic duration at 100% adoption rate
2 m	• Highly effective for epidemic control at 100% adoption rate • Relatively little quarantine time required • The most effective PDR for a 60% adoption rate with a usage stop	• Relatively high share of susceptible individuals in quarantine at 100% adoption • Much less effective at lower adoption rates compared to sites-wide CT
10 m	• Highly effective for epidemic control at 100% adoption rate • The least amount of quarantine time required of all PDRs at 100% adoption rate	• Relatively high share of susceptible individuals in quarantine at an 80% adoption rate or higher • Loses effectiveness under a scenario of a usage stop because of false positive quarantines, even at just 25% probability
Sites-wide	• Highly effective for epidemic control, when considering the maximum share of infectious individuals and the share of susceptible individuals at the end, even at 80% adoption rate • Out of all PDRs, the lowest epidemic duration at 100% adoption rate	• Highest share of quarantine time by susceptible individuals of more than 50% at only 60% adoption rate or higher • Relatively long quarantine times at an adoption rate of 60% or 80% • Strongly loses its effectiveness at 60% initial adoption and a usage stop effect