Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36510138›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2022

Differences in the superspreading potentials of COVID-19 across contact settings.

Yanji Zhao, Shi Zhao, Zihao Guo, Ziyue Yuan, Jinjun Ran, Lan Wu, Lin Yu, Hujiaojiao Li, Yu Shi, Daihai He

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

10 authors.

Yanji Zhao *Department of Applied Mathematics, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.
Shi Zhao *JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. zhaoshi.cmsa@gmail.com.
Zihao Guo *JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Ziyue YuanDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.
Jinjun RanSchool of Public Health, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Lan WuDepartment of Mathematics and Physics, Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Suzhou, China.
Lin YuFaculty of Arts and Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Hujiaojiao LiFaculty of Arts and Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Yu ShiYale School of Management, Yale University, New Haven, USA.
Daihai HeDepartment of Applied Mathematics, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China. daihai.he@polyu.edu.hk.

Funding

Research Grants Council, University Grants Committee HKU C7123-20G
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSuperspreading events (SSEs) played a critical role in fueling the COVID-19 outbreaks. Although it is well-known that COVID-19 epidemics exhibited substantial superspreading potential, little is known about the risk of observing SSEs in different contact settings. In this study, we aimed to assess the potential of superspreading in different contact settings in Japan.

methodTransmission cluster data from Japan was collected between January and July 2020. Infector-infectee transmission pairs were constructed based on the contact tracing history. We fitted the data to negative binomial models to estimate the effective reproduction number (R) and dispersion parameter (k). Other epidemiological issues relating to the superspreading potential were also calculated.

resultsThe overall estimated R and k are 0.561 (95% CrI: 0.496, 0.640) and 0.221 (95% CrI: 0.186, 0.262), respectively. The transmission in community, healthcare facilities and school manifest relatively higher superspreading potentials, compared to other contact settings. We inferred that 13.14% (95% CrI: 11.55%, 14.87%) of the most infectious cases generated 80% of the total transmission events. The probabilities of observing superspreading events for entire population and community, household, health care facilities, school, workplace contact settings are 1.75% (95% CrI: 1.57%, 1.99%), 0.49% (95% CrI: 0.22%, 1.18%), 0.07% (95% CrI: 0.06%, 0.08%), 0.67% (95% CrI: 0.31%, 1.21%), 0.33% (95% CrI: 0.13%, 0.94%), 0.32% (95% CrI: 0.21%, 0.60%), respectively.

conclusionThe different potentials of superspreading in contact settings highlighted the need to continuously monitoring the transmissibility accompanied with the dispersion parameter, to timely identify high risk settings favoring the occurrence of SSEs.

Indexed as

COVID-19Basic Reproduction NumberContact TracingDisease OutbreaksHumansSARS-CoV-2Contact settingsCOVID-19SuperspreadingTransmission heterogeneity

Identifiers

PMID36510138
PMCPMC9744370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.