METHODS: A total of three databases were searched on September 15, 2020: PubMed, Web of Science, and Science Direct. The searches were conducted using a pre-specified search strategy to record studies reported the reproductive number of coronavirus from its inception in December 2019. It includes keywords of coronavirus and its reproductive number, which were combined using the Boolean operators (AND, OR). Based on the included studies, we estimated a summary reproductive number by using the meta-analysis. We used narrative synthesis to explain the results of the studies where the reproductive number was reported, however, were not possible to include in the meta-analysis because of the lack of data (mostly due to confidence interval was not reported).
RESULTS: Total of 42 studies included in this review whereas 29 of them were included in the meta-analysis. The estimated summary reproductive number was 2.87 (95% CI, 2.39-3.44). We found evidence of very high heterogeneity (99.5%) of the reproductive number reported in the included studies. Our sub-group analysis was found the significant variations of reproductive number across the country for which it was estimated, method and model that were used to estimate the reproductive number, number of case that was considered to estimate the reproductive number, and the type of reproductive number that was estimated. The highest reproductive number was reported for the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship in Japan (14.8). In the country-level, the higher reproductive number was reported for France (R, 6.32, 95% CI, 5.72-6.99) following Germany (R, 6.07, 95% CI, 5.51-6.69) and Spain (R, 3.56, 95% CI, 1.62-7.82). The higher reproductive number was reported if it was estimated by using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo method (MCMC) method and the Epidemic curve model. We also reported significant heterogeneity of the type of reproductive number- a high-value reported if it was the time-dependent reproductive number.
CONCLUSION: The estimated summary reproductive number indicates an exponential increase of coronavirus infection in the coming days. Comprehensive policies and programs are important to reduce new infections as well as the associated adverse consequences including death.
METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted in December 2018 using a search string intended to identify articles describing IMD at mass gatherings, including religious pilgrimages, sports events, jamborees, and refugee camps. The search was limited to articles in English published from 2008 to 2018. Articles were included if they described IMD incidence at a mass gathering event.
RESULTS: A total of 127 articles were retrieved, of which 7 reported on IMD incidence at mass gatherings in the past 10 years. Specifically, in Saudi Arabia between 2002 and 2011, IMD occurred in 16 Hajj pilgrims and 1 Umrah pilgrim; serotypes involved were not reported. At a youth sports festival in Spain in 2008, 1 case of serogroup B IMD was reported among 1500 attendees. At the 2015 World Scout Jamboree in Japan, an outbreak of serogroup W IMD was identified in five scouts and one parent. At a refugee camp in Turkey, one case of serogroup B IMD was reported in a Syrian girl; four cases of serogroup X IMD occurred in an Italian refugee camp among refugees from Africa and Bangladesh. In 2017, a funeral in Liberia resulted in 13 identified cases of serogroup C IMD. Requiring meningococcal vaccination for mass gathering attendees and vaccinating refugees might have prevented these IMD cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Mass gathering events increase IMD risk among attendees and their close contacts. Vaccines preventing IMD caused by serogroups ACWY and B are available and should be recommended for mass gathering attendees.
FUNDING: Pfizer.