2022
DOI: 10.1111/irv.13002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Transmission of SARS‐CoV‐2 in standardised first few X cases and household transmission investigations: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract: We aimed to estimate the household secondary infection attack rate (hSAR) of SARS‐CoV‐2 in investigations aligned with the WHO Unity Studies Household Transmission Investigations (HHTI) protocol. We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and medRxiv/bioRxiv for “Unity‐aligned” First Few X cases (FFX) and HHTIs published 1 December 2019 to 26 July 2021. Standardised early results were shared by WHO Unity Studies co… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…32,33 It can be difficult to make direct comparisons between studies that are conducted in different countries and settings due to the unique features of local epidemics and adaptations required for implementation. 34 Studies should be interpreted in light of the local epidemiology and context−considerations should be made for the surveillance and contact tracing capacity, local incidence of COVID-19 cases during study implementation, predominant circulating SARS-CoV-2 variant, the timing and duration of the study, and study design including case ascertainment strategies and specimen sampling methods. Characteristics of individuals affected by COVID-19 and recruited into the study such as socioeconomic status, occupation and size of recruited households may also be significantly different across these studies, and therefore may influence aggregate outcomes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…32,33 It can be difficult to make direct comparisons between studies that are conducted in different countries and settings due to the unique features of local epidemics and adaptations required for implementation. 34 Studies should be interpreted in light of the local epidemiology and context−considerations should be made for the surveillance and contact tracing capacity, local incidence of COVID-19 cases during study implementation, predominant circulating SARS-CoV-2 variant, the timing and duration of the study, and study design including case ascertainment strategies and specimen sampling methods. Characteristics of individuals affected by COVID-19 and recruited into the study such as socioeconomic status, occupation and size of recruited households may also be significantly different across these studies, and therefore may influence aggregate outcomes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite robust individual case interviews and contact‐tracing records, missing data was the main challenge in this study. In the future, developing more country‐specific preplanned FFX to improve pandemic preparedness tailors public health and social measures around the evidence generated [ 34 ]. The local data collection capacity should also be modernized to assure data quality.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite this, higher SAR estimates were also observed in other African countries, including Madagascar (SAR 29.6%; 95% CI: 23.0%, 36.9%) 25 and Ethiopia (SAR 45.2%; 95% CI: 38.6%, 52.1%) 26 . A recent meta‐analysis highlighted the substantial heterogeneity in SAR estimates obtained from FFX investigations across the globe 27 . This heterogeneity may be attributed to differences in culture, pandemic activity or implementation of FFX protocols throughout the COVID‐19 pandemic and highlights the need for further standardisation of the FFX investigation protocol 27 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent meta‐analysis highlighted the substantial heterogeneity in SAR estimates obtained from FFX investigations across the globe 27 . This heterogeneity may be attributed to differences in culture, pandemic activity or implementation of FFX protocols throughout the COVID‐19 pandemic and highlights the need for further standardisation of the FFX investigation protocol 27 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%