Cargando…

A systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on COVID-19 infection fatality rates

An important unknown during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been the infection fatality rate (IFR). This differs from the case fatality rate (CFR) as an estimate of the number of deaths and as a proportion of the total number of cases, including those who are mild and asymptomat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meyerowitz-Katz, Gideon, Merone, Lea
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7524446/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33007452
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.09.1464
_version_ 1783588552731262976
author Meyerowitz-Katz, Gideon
Merone, Lea
author_facet Meyerowitz-Katz, Gideon
Merone, Lea
author_sort Meyerowitz-Katz, Gideon
collection PubMed
description An important unknown during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been the infection fatality rate (IFR). This differs from the case fatality rate (CFR) as an estimate of the number of deaths and as a proportion of the total number of cases, including those who are mild and asymptomatic. While the CFR is extremely valuable for experts, IFR is increasingly being called for by policy makers and the lay public as an estimate of the overall mortality from COVID-19. METHODS: Pubmed, Medline, SSRN, and Medrxiv were searched using a set of terms and Boolean operators on 25/04/2020 and re-searched on 14/05/2020, 21/05/2020 and 16/06/2020. Articles were screened for inclusion by both authors. Meta-analysis was performed in Stata 15.1 by using the metan command, based on IFR and confidence intervals extracted from each study. Google/Google Scholar was used to assess the grey literature relating to government reports. RESULTS: After exclusions, there were 24 estimates of IFR included in the final meta-analysis, from a wide range of countries, published between February and June 2020. The meta-analysis demonstrated a point estimate of IFR of 0.68% (0.53%–0.82%) with high heterogeneity (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of published evidence on COVID-19 until July 2020, the IFR of the disease across populations is 0.68% (0.53%–0.82%). However, due to very high heterogeneity in the meta-analysis, it is difficult to know if this represents a completely unbiased point estimate. It is likely that, due to age and perhaps underlying comorbidities in the population, different places will experience different IFRs due to the disease. Given issues with mortality recording, it is also likely that this represents an underestimate of the true IFR figure. More research looking at age-stratified IFR is urgently needed to inform policymaking on this front.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7524446
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75244462020-09-30 A systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on COVID-19 infection fatality rates Meyerowitz-Katz, Gideon Merone, Lea Int J Infect Dis Article An important unknown during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been the infection fatality rate (IFR). This differs from the case fatality rate (CFR) as an estimate of the number of deaths and as a proportion of the total number of cases, including those who are mild and asymptomatic. While the CFR is extremely valuable for experts, IFR is increasingly being called for by policy makers and the lay public as an estimate of the overall mortality from COVID-19. METHODS: Pubmed, Medline, SSRN, and Medrxiv were searched using a set of terms and Boolean operators on 25/04/2020 and re-searched on 14/05/2020, 21/05/2020 and 16/06/2020. Articles were screened for inclusion by both authors. Meta-analysis was performed in Stata 15.1 by using the metan command, based on IFR and confidence intervals extracted from each study. Google/Google Scholar was used to assess the grey literature relating to government reports. RESULTS: After exclusions, there were 24 estimates of IFR included in the final meta-analysis, from a wide range of countries, published between February and June 2020. The meta-analysis demonstrated a point estimate of IFR of 0.68% (0.53%–0.82%) with high heterogeneity (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of published evidence on COVID-19 until July 2020, the IFR of the disease across populations is 0.68% (0.53%–0.82%). However, due to very high heterogeneity in the meta-analysis, it is difficult to know if this represents a completely unbiased point estimate. It is likely that, due to age and perhaps underlying comorbidities in the population, different places will experience different IFRs due to the disease. Given issues with mortality recording, it is also likely that this represents an underestimate of the true IFR figure. More research looking at age-stratified IFR is urgently needed to inform policymaking on this front. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. 2020-12 2020-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7524446/ /pubmed/33007452 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.09.1464 Text en © 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Article
Meyerowitz-Katz, Gideon
Merone, Lea
A systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on COVID-19 infection fatality rates
title A systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on COVID-19 infection fatality rates
title_full A systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on COVID-19 infection fatality rates
title_fullStr A systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on COVID-19 infection fatality rates
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on COVID-19 infection fatality rates
title_short A systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on COVID-19 infection fatality rates
title_sort systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on covid-19 infection fatality rates
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7524446/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33007452
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.09.1464
work_keys_str_mv AT meyerowitzkatzgideon asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofpublishedresearchdataoncovid19infectionfatalityrates
AT meronelea asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofpublishedresearchdataoncovid19infectionfatalityrates
AT meyerowitzkatzgideon systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofpublishedresearchdataoncovid19infectionfatalityrates
AT meronelea systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofpublishedresearchdataoncovid19infectionfatalityrates