Cited by 44SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesInfection Control and Ventilation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Duration and distance of exposure are important predictors of transmission among community contacts of Ontario SARS cases

Open access

Abstract

SUMMARY: We report attack rates and contact-related predictors among community contacts of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) cases from the 2003 Toronto-area outbreak. Community contact data was extracted from public health records for single, well-defined exposures to a SARS case. In total, 8662 community-acquired exposures resulted in 61 probable cases; a crude attack rate of 0·70% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0·54–0·90]. Persons aged 55–69 years were at higher risk of acquiring SARS (1·14%) than those either younger (0·60%) or older (0·70%). In multivariable analysis exposures for at least 30 min at a distance of ⩽1 m increased the likelihood of becoming a SARS case 20·4-fold (95% CI 11·8–35·1). Risk related to duration of illness in the source case at time of exposure was greatest for illness duration of 7–10 days (rate ratio 3·4, 95% CI 1·9–6·1). Longer and closer proximity exposures incurred the highest rate of disease. Separate measures of time and distance from source cases should be added to minimum datasets for the assessment of interventions for SARS and other emerging diseases.

Overview

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 · 10.1017/s0950268806007771

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

  • General population attack rates were low; all but one high-QA-score study reported central estimates ranging from 0 to 5.18% (n=11 from six studies), and one higher estimate at 16.4%.

    “General population attack rates were low; all but one high-QA-score study reported central estimates ranging from 0 to 5⋅18%, corresponding to the midpoint of the estimate range captured by Rea and colleagues 53 (n=11 from six studies), and one higher estimate at 16⋅4% (figure 4A).”

    From Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) mathematical models and disease parameters: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [53]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
REA, E., LAFLÈCHE, J., STALKER, S., GUARDA, B. K., SHAPIRO, H., JOHNSON, I., BONDY, S. J., UPSHUR, R., RUSSELL, M. L., & ELIASZIW, M.
Affiliations
  • Toronto Public Health (CA)
  • Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
RUSSELL, M. L.
Venue
Epidemiology and Infection
Published
2007-01-12
Volume
135
Issue
6
Pages
914-921
ISSN
  • 0950-2688 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-4409
OpenAlex
W2162759163
Cited by
44
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Epidemiology and Infection (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Infection Control and Ventilation
Keywords
SARS, SARS transmission, community contacts, attack rate, exposure duration, exposure distance, age as risk factor, emerging infectious diseases, contact tracing
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Child, Preschool, Disease Outbreaks, Environmental Exposure, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Male, Middle Aged, Ontario, Risk Factors, Time Factors, Community-Acquired Infections, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome

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