Secondary attack rate in household contacts of COVID-19 Paediatric index cases: a study from Western India

  1. Komal Shah
  2. Yogini Kandre
  3. Dileep Mavalankar

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

Role of pediatric cases in secondary transmission of COVID-19 is not well understood. We aim to study secondary attack rate (SAR) of COVID-19 in household contacts of pediatric index cases from Gujarat, Western Indian state.

Methods

For this cross-sectional study, details of 2412 paediatric patients were collected from Government records. Through stratified random sampling 10% (n = 242) of the patients were selected for the study and were telephonically contacted for obtaining the details of household secondary infection; 72 pediatric index cases having 287 household contacts were included in the study.

Results

The SAR in household contacts of pediatric index cases was 1.7% (95% CI: 0.74–4%). Majority of the index cases were males (94.4%) with 66% of the patients being admitted at various hospitals and isolation facilities (45%); 37% were home quarantine. Of 72, 50 (74%) cases were aged between 12 and 18 years. The family size of the index cases causing secondary infection was comparatively larger than index cases without secondary household infection (6.75 ± 2.3 versus 4.9 ± 1.9; P = 0.034).

Conclusions

The household SAR from pediatric patients is low and is closely associated with the family size of the index cases. Hence, home quarantine should be advocated in smaller families with appropriate isolation facilities.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1093/pubmed/fdaa269
  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.11.17.20231290v2 on medRxiv
  3. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.17.20231290: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: Relatives of these 28 expired cases were interviewed after taking verbal consent by research team.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  4. Version published to 10.1101/2020.11.17.20231290v1 on medRxiv