Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40567988›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

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.

Yu Zeng, Jiaqi Xv, Li Cui

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Yu ZengLonggang Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China.
Jiaqi XvLonggang Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China.
Li CuiLonggang Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Identifying high-risk groups and developing specific interventions is essential to combat pandemic including COVID-19. We estimated key factors of demographic characteristic, exposure-related variables, and vaccination status in secondary infection among close contacts throughout the zero-COVID policy. Methods: We used contact tracing data from 622 primary cases and 31,278 close contacts between February 2020 and December 2022 in the northeast of Shenzhen, China. The multivariate logistic regression was utilized to identify factors affecting SARS-CoV-2 infection of close contacts. Results: The secondary attack rate (SAR) of close contacts was 1.4% (95% CI: 1.3-1.5%), and the associated factors included over 50 (OR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.13-1.91), living in urban village housing (OR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.04-2.19), closer relationship with primary cases (e.g., household members: OR = 44.06, 95% CI: 34.45-56.36), last exposure occurring before the illness onset of cases (e.g., >2 days before: OR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.27-1.00), exposed to cases with moderate symptoms (OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.40-0.95), and better COVID-19 vaccination status (e.g., booster vaccination within 6 months before the last exposure: OR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.24-0.60). Conclusion: Our findings should be helpful to develop targeted surveillance and interventions for these high-risk groups to understand ongoing COVID-19 issue and improve future pandemic management.

Indexed as

Contact TracingCOVID-19AdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolChinaFemaleHumansInfantMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSARS-CoV-2associated factorsclose contactsSARS-CoV-2secondary attack ratevaccination

Identifiers

PMID40567988
PMCPMC12187859

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.