ReviewEpidemiology and infection2021
A network meta-analysis of secondary attack rates of COVID-19 in different contact environments.
Review in Epidemiology and infection, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Oro-faecal transmission of SARS-CoV-2: A systematic review of studies employing viral culture from gastrointestinal and other potential oro-faecal sources and evidence for transmission to humans.Epidemiology and infection · 2024Pooled it
- Attribution of super-spreaders to the COVID-19 outbreak.Biosafety and health · 2025Article
- Associated factors in SARS-CoV-2 infection among close contacts during the zero-COVID policy from 2020 to 2022 in the northeast of Shenzhen, China: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Estimating the household secondary attack rate and serial interval of COVID-19 using social media.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- A network meta-analysis of risk factors of infection among close contacts of COVID-19.Heliyon · 2023Article
- SARS-CoV-2 transmission modes: Why and how contamination occurs around shared meals and drinks?Food microbiology · 2023Review
- Spread of viruses, which measures are the most apt to control COVID-19?Infectious diseases now · 2023Review
- Association of healthcare worker behaviors with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) risk during four pandemic periods and characteristics associated with high-risk behaviors.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues around the world, understanding the transmission characteristics of COVID-19 is vital for prevention and control. We conducted the first study aiming to estimate and compare the relative risk of secondary attack rates (SARs) of COVID-19 in different contact environments. Until 26 July 2021, epidemiological studies and cluster epidemic reports of COVID-19 were retrieved from SCI, Embase, PubMed, CNKI, Wanfang and CBM in English and Chinese, respectively. Relative risks (RRs) were estimated in pairwise comparisons of SARs between different contact environments using the frequentist NMA framework, and the ranking of risks in these environments was calculated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Subgroup analysis was performed by regions. Thirty-two studies with 68 260 participants were identified. Compared with meal or gathering, transportation (RR 10.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.43-77.85), medical care (RR 11.68, 95% CI 1.58-86.61) and work or study places (RR 10.15, 95% CI 1.40-73.38) had lower risk ratios for SARs. Overall, the SUCRA rankings from the highest to the lowest were household (95.3%), meal or gathering (81.4%), public places (58.9%), daily conversation (50.1%), transportation (30.8%), medical care (18.2%) and work or study places (15.3%). Household SARs were significantly higher than other environments in the subgroup of mainland China and sensitive analysis without small sample studies (<100). In light of the risks, stratified personal protection and public health measures need to be in place accordingly, so as close contacts categorising and management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.