Nationwide study on SARS-CoV-2 transmission within households from lockdown to reopening, Denmark, 27 February 2020 to 1 August 2020

  1. Frederik Plesner Lyngse
  2. Carsten Kirkeby
  3. Tariq Halasa
  4. Viggo Andreasen
  5. Robert Leo Skov
  6. Frederik Trier Møller
  7. Tyra Grove Krause
  8. Kåre Mølbak

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most serious global public health threats of recent times. Understanding SARS-CoV-2 transmission is key for outbreak response and to take action against the spread of disease. Transmission within the household is a concern, especially because infection control is difficult to apply within this setting.

Aim

The objective of this observational study was to investigate SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Danish households during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We used comprehensive administrative register data from Denmark, comprising the full population and all COVID-19 tests from 27 February 2020 to 1 August 2020, to estimate household transmission risk and attack rate.

Results

We found that the day after receiving a positive test result within the household, 35% (788/2,226) of potential secondary cases were tested and 13% (98/779) of these were positive. In 6,782 households, we found that 82% (1,827/2,226) of potential secondary cases were tested within 14 days and 17% (371/2,226) tested positive as secondary cases, implying an attack rate of 17%. We found an approximate linear increasing relationship between age and attack rate. We investigated the transmission risk from primary cases by age, and found an increasing risk with age of primary cases for adults (aged ≥ 15 years), while the risk seems to decrease with age for children (aged < 15 years).

Conclusions

Although there is an increasing attack rate and transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 with age, children are also able to transmit SARS-CoV-2 within the household.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.2807/1560-7917.es.2022.27.6.2001800
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.09.20191239: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    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.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.09.09.20191239v1 on medRxiv