Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: Understanding the transmissibility and pathogenicity of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is crucial for control policies, but evidence remains limited. METHODS: We presented a systematic and meta-analytic summary concerning the transmissibility and pathogenicity of COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 105 studies were identified, with 35042 infected cases and 897912 close contacts. 48.6% (51/105) of studies on secondary transmissions were from China. We estimated a total SIR of 7.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.8%-8.8%), SAR of 6.6% (95% CI, 5.7%-7.5%), and symptomatic infection ratio of 86.9% (95%CI, 83.9%-89.9%) with a disease series interval of 5.84 (95%CI, 4.92-6.94) days. Household contacts had a higher risk of both symptomatic and asymptomatic infection, and transmission was driven between index cases and second-generation cases, with little transmission occurring in second-to-later-generation cases (SIR, 12.4% vs. 3.6%). The symptomatic infection ratio was not significantly different in terms of infection time, generation, type of contact, and index cases. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a higher risk of infection among household contacts. Transmissibility decreased with generations during the intervention. Pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 varied among territories, but didn't change over time. Strict isolation and medical observation measures should be implemented.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shi et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: