4.7 Article

Serial interval of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) infections

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.02.060

关键词

Coronavirus; Outbreak; Illness onset; Generation time; Statistical model; Epidemiology; Viruses

资金

  1. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development [JP18fk0108050]
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [17H04701, 17H05808, 18H04895, 19H01074]
  3. Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology (CREST) program [JPMJCR1413]
  4. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To estimate the serial interval of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) from information on 28 infector-infectee pairs. Methods: We collected dates of illness onset for primary cases (infectors) and secondary cases (infectees) from published research articles and case investigation reports. We subjectively ranked the credibility of the data and performed analyses on both the full dataset (n = 28) and a subset of pairs with highest certainty in reporting (n = 18). In addition, we adjust for right truncation of the data as the epidemic is still in its growth phase. Results: Accounting for right truncation and analyzing all pairs, we estimated the median serial interval at 4.0 days (95% credible interval [CrI]: 3.1, 4.9). Limiting our data to only the most certain pairs, the median serial interval was estimated at 4.6 days (95% CrI: 3.5, 5.9). Conclusions: The serial interval of COVID-19 is close to or shorter than its median incubation period. This suggests that a substantial proportion of secondary transmission may occur prior to illness onset. The COVID-19 serial interval is also shorter than the serial interval of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), indicating that calculations made using the SARS serial interval may introduce bias. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据