Objective: This systematic review estimated the pooled (Formula presented.) for early COVID-19 outbreaks and identified the impact of study-related factors such as methods, study location and study period on the estimated (Formula presented.). Methods: We searched electronic databases for human studies published in English between 1 December 2019 and 30 September 2020 with no restriction on country/region. Two investigators independently performed the data extraction of the studies selected for inclusion during full-text screening. The primary outcome, (Formula presented.), was analysed by random-effects meta-analysis using the restricted maximum likelihood method. Results: We identified 26,425 studies through our search and included 151 articles in the systematic review, among which 81 were included in the meta-analysis. The estimates of (Formula presented.) from studies included in the meta-analysis ranged from 0.4 to 12.58. The pooled (Formula presented.) for COVID-19 was estimated to be 2.66 (95% CI, 2.41–2.94). The results showed heterogeneity among studies and strong evidence of a small-study effect. Conclusions: The high heterogeneity in studies makes the use of the (Formula presented.) for basic epidemic planning difficult and presents a huge problem for risk assessment and data synthesis. Consensus on the use of (Formula presented.) for outbreak assessment is needed, and its use for assessing epidemic risk is not recommended.
CITATION STYLE
Dhungel, B., Rahman, M. S., Rahman, M. M., Bhandari, A. K. C., Le, P. M., Biva, N. A., & Gilmour, S. (2022, September 1). Reliability of Early Estimates of the Basic Reproduction Number of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811613
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.