Twitter | Search | |
Dr Zoë Hyde
(1/5) Pre-print study (interpret carefully) of contact tracing in Trento, Italy. Children aged 0-14 slightly less likely to be infected than adults (attack rate: 8.4% vs. 13.3% overall), but more likely to transmit virus (22.4% vs. 13.2% overall).
Reply Retweet Like More
Dr Zoë Hyde Jul 30
Replying to @DrZoeHyde
(2/5) Many of the children who transmitted the virus were aged under 10. The authors suggested that high transmission in children could be attributable to the difficultly of isolating a child with the virus. Adults may adhere to isolation precautions more readily than children.
Reply Retweet Like
Dr Zoë Hyde Jul 30
Replying to @DrZoeHyde
(3/5) The study has some limitations. Not all contacts were tested; in many instances the development of symptoms plus a link to a known case was relied upon to determine if someone had become infected.
Reply Retweet Like
Dr Zoë Hyde Jul 30
Replying to @DrZoeHyde
(4/5) Because children generally have more mild disease than adults, more cases in children could have been missed than in adults. The effect of this would be to underestimate the vulnerability of children to infection.
Reply Retweet Like
Dr Zoë Hyde Jul 30
Replying to @DrZoeHyde
(5/5) The authors suggest a "policy of maximum caution with respect to the reopening of children's communities and primary schools."
Reply Retweet Like
Dr Zoë Hyde Jul 30
Replying to @DrZoeHyde
Addendum: I think the category "25-29" in the table is a typo and should read "15-29".
Reply Retweet Like
boris thespie Jul 30
unroll please
Reply Retweet Like
Thread Reader App Jul 30
Bonjour, please find the unroll here: : (1/5) Pre-print study (interpret carefully) of contact tracing in Trento, Italy. Children aged 0-14… See you soon. 🤖
Reply Retweet Like
Cardinal Pirelli Jul 30
Replying to @DrZoeHyde
What happened to the 15-24 year olds?!?
Reply Retweet Like
Ale_Mezza 🇮🇹🇨🇦🧪🐾 Jul 31
it is likely a typo. probably 15-29 in the table and not 25-29, as points out
Reply Retweet Like
WHERE'S the WALLdo Aug 5
Replying to @DrZoeHyde
the fact that they could only find 14 symptomatic kids for the study isn't making the point they think it is. Only 1.3% of the contacts that became cases were from 0-14 age group, far & away the least of any group. Study shows exact opposite of what it claims.
Reply Retweet Like