Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37084751›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Microbe2023

SARS-CoV-2 incubation period across variants of concern, individual factors, and circumstances of infection in France: a case series analysis from the ComCor study.

Simon Galmiche, Thomas Cortier, Tiffany Charmet, Laura Schaeffer, Olivia Chény, Cassandre von Platen, Anne Lévy, Sophie Martin, Faïza Omar, Christophe David and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Microbe, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
18.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Why Andes hantavirus is not the next SARS-CoV-2: contrasting viral shedding, transmissibility and genomic patterns.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Simon GalmicheEmerging Diseases Epidemiology Unit, Institut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France; Ecole Doctorale Pierre Louis de Santé Publique, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Thomas CortierMathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases Unit, Institut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France; Ecole Doctorale Pierre Louis de Santé Publique, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Tiffany CharmetEmerging Diseases Epidemiology Unit, Institut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Laura SchaefferEmerging Diseases Epidemiology Unit, Institut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Olivia ChényCentre for Translational Research, Institut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Cassandre von PlatenCentre for Translational Research, Institut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Anne LévyCaisse Nationale de l'Assurance Maladie, Paris, France.
Sophie MartinCaisse Nationale de l'Assurance Maladie, Paris, France.
Faïza OmarInstitut Ipsos, Paris, France.
Christophe DavidInstitut Ipsos, Paris, France.
Alexandra MaillesPublic Health France, Saint-Maurice, France.
Fabrice CarratThe National Institute of Health and Medical Research, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Simon CauchemezMathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases Unit, Institut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Arnaud FontanetEmerging Diseases Epidemiology Unit, Institut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France; Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers, Unité Pasteur-Cnam Risques Infectieux et Émergents, Paris, France. Electronic address: fontanet@pasteur.fr.
Institut Pasteur · FRl'Assurance Maladie · FRSorbonne Université · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe incubation period of SARS-CoV-2 has been estimated for the known variants of concern. However, differences in study designs and settings make comparing variants difficult. We aimed to estimate the incubation period for each variant of concern compared with the historical strain within a unique and large study to identify individual factors and circumstances associated with its duration.

methodsIn this case series analysis, we included participants (aged ≥18 years) of the ComCor case-control study in France who had a SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis between Oct 27, 2020, and Feb 4, 2022. Eligible participants were those who had the historical strain or a variant of concern during a single encounter with a known index case who was symptomatic and for whom the incubation period could be established, those who reported doing a reverse-transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) test, and those who were symptomatic by study completion. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, exposure information, circumstances of infection, and COVID-19 vaccination details were obtained via an online questionnaire, and variants were established through variant typing after RT-PCR testing or by matching the time that a positive test was reported with the predominance of a specific variant. We used multivariable linear regression to identify factors associated with the duration of the incubation period (defined as the number of days from contact with the index case to symptom onset).

findings20 413 participants were eligible for inclusion in this study. Mean incubation period varied across variants: 4·96 days (95% CI 4·90-5·02) for alpha (B.1.1.7), 5·18 days (4·93-5·43) for beta (B.1.351) and gamma (P.1), 4·43 days (4·36-4·49) for delta (B.1.617.2), and 3·61 days (3·55-3·68) for omicron (B.1.1.529) compared with 4·61 days (4·56-4·66) for the historical strain. Participants with omicron had a shorter incubation period than participants with the historical strain (-0·9 days, 95% CI -1·0 to -0·7). The incubation period increased with age (participants aged ≥70 years had an incubation period 0·4 days [0·2 to 0·6] longer than participants aged 18-29 years), in female participants (by 0·1 days, 0·0 to 0·2), and in those who wore a mask during contact with the index case (by 0·2 days, 0·1 to 0·4), and was reduced in those for whom the index case was symptomatic (-0·1 days, -0·2 to -0·1). These data were robust to sensitivity analyses correcting for an over-reporting of incubation periods of 7 days.

interpretationSARS-CoV-2 incubation period is notably reduced in omicron cases compared with all other variants of concern, in young people, after transmission from a symptomatic index case, after transmission to a maskless secondary case, and (to a lesser extent) in men. These findings can inform future COVID-19 contact-tracing strategies and modelling.

fundingInstitut Pasteur, the French National Agency for AIDS Research-Emerging Infectious Diseases, Fondation de France, the INCEPTION project, and the Integrative Biology of Emerging Infectious Diseases project.

Indexed as

Communicable Diseases, EmergingCOVID-19AdolescentAdultCase-Control StudiesCOVID-19 TestingCOVID-19 VaccinesFemaleFranceHumansInfectious Disease Incubation PeriodMaleResearch DesignSARS-CoV-2COVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID37084751
PMCPMC10112864
OpenAlexW4366257340

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.