SynthesisEpidemiology and infection2023
Comparative analysis of inflight transmission of SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and SARS-CoV-1.
Synthesis in Epidemiology and infection, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying crowding-ventilation effect on respiratory infections.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Flight Volume Effects on COVID-19 and Influenza Transmission Across Variable Control Intensities, 2019-2024.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Methodology of Epidemic Risk Analysis in the Naval Military.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- Interrogating the lack of diversity of thought in the pandemic response that led to mistakes - holistic evidence-based approach to deal with future pandemics.Frontiers in public health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to evaluate the infection risk of aircraft passengers seated within and beyond two rows of the index case(s) of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, and SARS-CoV-1. PubMed databases were searched for articles containing information on air travel-related transmission of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, and SARS-CoV-1 infections. We performed a meta-analysis of inflight infection data. In the eight flights where the attack rate could be calculated, the inflight SARS-CoV-2 attack rates ranged from 2.6% to 16.1%. The risk ratios of infection for passengers seated within and outside the two rows of the index cases were 5.64 (95% confidence interval (CI):1.94-16.40) in SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks, 4.26 (95% CI:1.08-16.81) in the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus outbreaks, and 1.91 (95% CI:0.80-4.55) in SARS-CoV-1 outbreaks. Furthermore, we found no significant difference between the attack rates of SARS-CoV-2 in flights where the passengers were wearing masks and those where they were not (
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.