Cited by 140COVID-19 epidemiological studiesSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies

Association of Age and Pediatric Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Open access
Paul, Lauren A., Daneman, Nick, Schwartz, Kevin L., Science, Michelle, Brown, Kevin A., Whelan, Michael, Chan, Ellen, Buchan, Sarah A.·2021·JAMA Pediatrics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Importance: As a result of low numbers of pediatric cases early in the COVID-19 pandemic, pediatric household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 remains an understudied topic. Objective: To determine whether there are differences in the odds of household transmission by younger children compared with older children. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study took place between June 1 and December 31, 2020, in Ontario, Canada. Private households in which the index case individual of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was younger than 18 years were included. Individuals were excluded if they resided in apartments missing suite information, in households with multiple index cases, or in households where the age of the index case individual was missing. Exposures: Age group of pediatric index cases categorized as 0 to 3, 4 to 8, 9 to 13, and 14 to 17 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Household transmission, defined as households where at least 1 secondary case occurred 1 to 14 days after the pediatric index case. Results: A total of 6280 households had pediatric index cases, and 1717 households (27.3%) experienced secondary transmission. The mean (SD) age of pediatric index case individuals was 10.7 (5.1) years and 2863 (45.6%) were female individuals. Children aged 0 to 3 years had the highest odds of transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to household contacts compared with children aged 14 to 17 years (odds ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.17-1.75). This association was similarly observed in sensitivity analyses defining secondary cases as 2 to 14 days or 4 to 14 days after the index case and stratified analyses by presence of symptoms, association with a school/childcare outbreak, or school/childcare reopening. Children aged 4 to 8 years and 9 to 13 years also had increased odds of transmission (aged 4-8 years: odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.18-1.67; aged 9-13 years: odds ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.97-1.32). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that younger children may be more likely to transmit SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with older children, and the highest odds of transmission was observed for children aged 0 to 3 years. Differential infectivity of pediatric age groups has implications for infection prevention within households, as well as schools/childcare, to minimize risk of household secondary transmission. Additional population-based studies are required to establish the risk of transmission by younger pediatric index cases.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.2770

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Indirect benefits of vaccination include the likelihood of reduced transmission in the home and school settings, including transmission affecting vulnerable persons, and safer in-person learning.

    “Indirect benefits include the likelihood of reduced transmission in the home and in school settings, including transmission affecting vulnerable persons, and safer in-person learning.26-29”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Arnedo-Pena A, Sabater-Vidal S, Meseguer-Ferrer N, et al COVID-19 secondary attack rate and risk factors in household contacts in Castellon (Spain): preliminary report. Rev Enf Emerg. 2020;19(2):64-70.
  2. Lyngse FP, Kirkeby CT, Halasa T, et al COVID-19 transmission within Danish households: A nationwide study from lockdown to reopening. medRxiv. 2020. doi:10.1101/2020.09.09.20191239 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Paul, L. A., Daneman, N., Schwartz, K. L., Science, M., Brown, K. A., Whelan, M., Chan, E., & Buchan, S. A.
Affiliations
  • Public Health Ontario (CA)
  • Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Buchan, Sarah A.
Venue
JAMA Pediatrics
Published
2021-11-01
Volume
175
Issue
11
Pages
1151
ISSN
  • 1072-4710 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-6203
OpenAlex
W3194784134
Cited by
140
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 19
FWCI
11.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 pandemic, household transmission, pediatric infection, child age, secondary transmission, household contacts, Ontario
MeSH terms
COVID-19, Adolescent, Age Factors, Child, Child, Preschool, Family Characteristics, Female, Humans, Infant, Male, Ontario, Age Distribution

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review