Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32498136›Full record

SynthesisJournal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi2020

Estimate of the Basic Reproduction Number for COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Yousef Alimohamadi, Maryam Taghdir, Mojtaba Sepandi

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 166 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
166citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

166 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Anxiety Linked to COVID-19: A Systematic Review Comparing Anxiety Rates in Different Populations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Case fatality rate of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The theory of epidemics with altruism.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

106 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yousef AlimohamadiPars Advanced and Minimally Invasive Medical Manners Research Center, Pars Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Maryam TaghdirHealth Research Center, Lifestyle Institute, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mojtaba SepandiHealth Research Center, Lifestyle Institute, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is one of the main public health challenges currently facing the world. Because of its high transmissibility, COVID-19 has already caused extensive morbidity and mortality in many countries throughout the world. An accurate estimation of the basic reproduction number (R0) of COVID-19 would be beneficial for prevention programs. In light of discrepancies in original research on this issue, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled R0 for COVID-19 in the current outbreak.

methodsInternational databases (including Google Scholar, Science Direct, PubMed, and Scopus) were searched to identify studies conducted regarding the R0 of COVID-19. Articles were searched using the following keywords: "COVID-19" and "basic reproduction number" or "R0." The heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the I2 index, the Cochran Q test, and T2. A random-effects model was used to estimate R0 in this study.

resultsThe mean reported R0 in the identified articles was 3.38±1.40, with a range of 1.90 to 6.49. According to the results of the random-effects model, the pooled R0 for COVID-19 was estimated as 3.32 (95% confidence interval, 2.81 to 3.82). According to the results of the meta-regression analysis, the type of model used to estimate R0 did not have a significant effect on heterogeneity among studies (p=0.81).

conclusionsConsidering the estimated R0 for COVID-19, reducing the number of contacts within the population is a necessary step to control the epidemic. The estimated overall R0 was higher than the World Health Organization estimate.

Indexed as

Basic Reproduction NumberBetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19Global HealthHumansPandemicsPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2Basic reproduction numberCOVID-19Meta-analysisOutbreakPublic health

Identifiers

PMID32498136
PMCPMC7280807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.