Imperial College London
Alternate

Professor Neil Ferguson

Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health

Director of the School of Public Health
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 3296neil.ferguson Website

 
 
//

Location

 

508School of Public HealthWhite City Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@techreport{Thompson:2020:10.25561/84270,
author = {Thompson, H and Mousa, A and Dighe, A and Fu, H and Arnedo-Pena, A and Barrett, P and Bellido-Blasco, J and Bi, Q and Caputi, A and Chaw, L and De, Maria L and Hoffmann, M and Mahapure, K and Ng, K and Raghuram, J and Singh, G and Soman, B and Soriano, V and Valent, F and Vimercati, L and En, Wee L and Wong, J and Ghani, A and Ferguson, N},
doi = {10.25561/84270},
title = {Report 38: SARS-CoV-2 setting-specific transmission rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.25561/84270},
year = {2020}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - RPRT
AB  - Since the end of 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread rapidly across the world. Understanding the drivers of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is crucial for disease control policies but evidence of transmission rates in different settings remains limited. We conducted a systematic review to estimate the secondary attack rate (SAR) and observed reproduction number (Robs) in different settings and to explore differences by age, symptom status, duration of exposure and household size. A total of 97 studies were identified, 45 of which met inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. Households showed the highest transmission rates, with pooled SAR and Robs estimates of 21.1% (95% CI: 17.4%-24.8%) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.67-1.32), respectively. Household SAR estimates were significantly higher where the duration of household exposure exceeded 5 days compared with exposure of 5 days or less. Attack rates related to familiar and prolonged close contacts, such as social events with family and friends were higher than those related to low-risk casual contacts, such as strangers (SAR of 5.9%, 95% CI: 3.8%-8.1% vs. 1.2%, 95% CI: 0.3%-2.1%). Estimates of SAR for asymptomatic index cases were approximately two thirds of those for symptomatic index (3.5% vs. 12.8%, p<0.001). We find moderate evidence for less transmission both from and to individuals under 20 years of age in the household context, but this difference is less evident when examining all settings. Prolonged contact in households and in settings with familiar close contacts increases the potential for transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, the differences observed in transmissibility by symptom status of index cases and the potential for age-dependent effects has important implications for outbreak control strategies such as contact tracing, testing and rapid isolation of cases. There was limited data to allow exploration of transmission patterns in workplaces, schools, and care-homes, hig
AU  - Thompson,H
AU  - Mousa,A
AU  - Dighe,A
AU  - Fu,H
AU  - Arnedo-Pena,A
AU  - Barrett,P
AU  - Bellido-Blasco,J
AU  - Bi,Q
AU  - Caputi,A
AU  - Chaw,L
AU  - De,Maria L
AU  - Hoffmann,M
AU  - Mahapure,K
AU  - Ng,K
AU  - Raghuram,J
AU  - Singh,G
AU  - Soman,B
AU  - Soriano,V
AU  - Valent,F
AU  - Vimercati,L
AU  - En,Wee L
AU  - Wong,J
AU  - Ghani,A
AU  - Ferguson,N
DO  - 10.25561/84270
PY  - 2020///
TI  - Report 38: SARS-CoV-2 setting-specific transmission rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.25561/84270
UR  - https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-11-38-COVID19-Report-38.pdf
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/84270
ER  -
Download