The role of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections: rapid living systematic review and meta-analysis
================================================================================================

* Diana C Buitrago-Garcia
* Dianne Egli-Gany
* Michel J Counotte
* Stefanie Hossmann
* Hira Imeri
* Aziz Mert Ipekci
* Georgia Salanti
* Nicola Low

## ABSTRACT

**OBJECTIVE** To address three questions: 1. amongst people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2, what proportion does not experience symptoms at all during their infection? 2. Amongst people with SARS-CoV-2 infection who are asymptomatic when diagnosed, what proportion will develop symptoms later? 3. What proportion of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is accounted for by people who are either asymptomatic throughout infection, or pre-symptomatic?

**DESIGN** Rapid living systematic review and meta-analysis.

**DATA SOURCES** PubMed, Embase, bioRxiv and medRxiv using a living evidence database of SARS-CoV-2 literature, searched on 25 March 2020 and updated on 20 April 2020.

**STUDY SELECTION** Studies of people with SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed by reverse transcriptase PCR that documented follow-up and symptom status at the beginning and end of follow-up or modelling studies.

**DATA EXTRACTION** One reviewer extracted data and a second verified the extraction, with disagreement resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Risk of bias was assessed with an adapted checklist for case series and a questionnaire to assess relevance and credibility of modelling studies.

**RESULTS** We screened 315 records and included 37. The overall estimate of the proportion of people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 and remain asymptomatic throughout infection was 15% (95% CI 10 to 22%) with a prediction interval of 3 to 55% in 28 studies that addressed this review question. There was some evidence that bias in the selection of participants influences the outcome. The proportion of people that is pre-symptomatic could not be summarised, owing to heterogeneity. In modelling studies, 40-60% of all SARS-CoV-2 infections are the result of transmission from pre-symptomatic individuals, with a smaller contribution from asymptomatic individuals.

**CONCLUSION** An intermediate contribution of pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic infections to overall SARS-CoV-2 transmission means that combination prevention measures, with enhanced hand and respiratory hygiene, testing tracing and isolation strategies and social distancing, will continue to be needed. The findings of this living systematic review of publications early in the pandemic suggests that most SARS-CoV-2 infections are not asymptomatic throughout the course of infection.

Changes from version 1, search date 25.03.2020, 11 included studies

*   Search date 20.04.2020, 37 studies included

*   Review question 1. Amongst people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2, what proportion does not experience symptoms at all during their infection? Summary estimate 15% (95% confidence interval, CI 10 to 22%, prediction interval 3 to 55%, 28 studies, random effect model. Version 1, summary estimate 29% (95% confidence interval 23 to 37%, 8 studies, fixed effect model);

*   Review question 2. Amongst people with SARS-CoV-2 infection who are asymptomatic when diagnosed, what proportion will develop symptoms later? Fifteen studies included, no change in result;

*   Review question 3. What proportion of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is accounted for by people who are either asymptomatic throughout infection, or pre-symptomatic? Four studies included, no change in result;

*   One new co-author.

**SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION** Protocol [https://osf.io/9ewys/](https://osf.io/9ewys/)

KEY WORDS
*   covid-19
*   asymptomatic infections
*   living systematic review

## Introduction

There is substantial disagreement about the level of asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Authors of a World Health Organization report stated that, “The proportion of truly asymptomatic infections is unclear but appears to be relatively rare and does not appear to be a major driver of transmission.”1 In contrast, reports of new infections found on a single day have led to statements that “the large majority of coronavirus infections do not result in symptoms.”2 The disagreement results, in part, from the interpretation of studies that report a proportion of asymptomatic people with SARS-CoV-2 detected at a single point.2,3 These studies include both people who will remain asymptomatic throughout and those, known as pre-symptomatic,4 who will develop symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) if followed until at least the end of the incubation period of 14 days.5 The full spectrum and distribution of covid-19, from completely asymptomatic, to mild and non-specific symptoms, viral pneumonia, respiratory distress syndrome and death are not yet known.6 Without follow up, however, the proportions of asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infections cannot be determined.

Accurate estimates of the proportions of true asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infections are needed urgently because their contribution to overall SARS-CoV-2 transmission at the population level will determine the appropriate balance of control measures.6 If the predominant route of transmission is from people who have symptoms, then strategies should focus on testing, followed by isolation of infected individuals and quarantine of their contacts. If, however, most transmission is from people without symptoms, social distancing measures that reduce contact with people who might be infectious, should be prioritised.6

The objectives of this study were to address three questions: 1. Amongst people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2, what proportion does not experience symptoms at all during their infection? 2. Amongst people with SARS-CoV-2 infection who are asymptomatic when diagnosed, what proportion will develop symptoms later? 3. What proportion of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is accounted for by people who are either asymptomatic throughout infection, or pre-symptomatic?

## Methods

We conducted a living systematic review, following a published protocol ([https://osf.io/9ewys/](https://osf.io/9ewys/)) and using methods for rapid assessment of relevant evidence during a public health emergency.7 We report our findings according to the statement on preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses.8 Box 1 shows our definitions of symptoms, asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic status. We use the term asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection for people without symptoms of covid-19 who remain asymptomatic throughout the course of infection only. We use the term pre-symptomatic for people who do not have symptoms of covid-19 when enrolled in a study, but who develop symptoms during adequate follow-up.

#### Box 1. Definitions of symptoms and symptom status in a person with SARS-CoV-2 infections

**Symptoms:** symptoms that a person experiences and reports. We used the authors’ definitions.

We searched included manuscripts for an explicit statement that the study participant did not report symptoms that they experienced. Some authors defined ‘asymptomatic’ as an absence of self-reported symptoms. We did not include clinical signs observed or elicited on examination.

**Asymptomatic infection:** a person with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, who has no symptoms, according to the authors’ report, at the time of first clinical assessment and had no symptoms at the end of follow-up. The end of follow-up was defined as: virological cure, with one or more negative RT-PCR test results; follow-up for 14 days or more after the last possible exposure to an index case, or; follow-up for seven days or more after the first RT-PCR positive result if the date of last exposure could not be determined.

**Pre-symptomatic:** a person with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, who has no symptoms, according to the authors’ report, at the time of first clinical assessment, but who developed symptoms by the end of follow-up. The end of follow-up was defined as: virological cure, with one or more negative RT-PCR test results; follow-up for 14 days or more after the last possible exposure to an index case, or; follow-up for seven days or more after the first RT-PCR positive result if the date of last exposure could not be determined.

### Information sources and search

We conducted the first search on March 25, 2020 and updated it on April 20, 2020. We searched the covid-19 living evidence database, which includes daily updates of searches of four electronic databases: Medline Pubmed, Ovid Embase, bioRxiv and medRxiv, using medical subject headings and keywords for SARS-CoV-2 infection and covid-19.9 The data supplement reports the search strings for each database. We selected records in any language that contained predefined search terms in the title or abstract (Data supplement, Text S1). We also examined articles suggested by experts and the reference lists of retrieved mathematical modelling studies and systematic reviews.

### Eligibility criteria

We included studies of people with SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed by reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) that documented follow-up and symptom status at the beginning and end of follow-up, or investigated the contribution to SARS-CoV-2 transmission of asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic infection. We included contact tracing investigations, case series, cohort studies, case-control studies and statistical and mathematical modelling studies. We excluded the following study types: case reports of a single patient and case series where patients were not enrolled consecutively. Where multiple records included data from the same study population, we linked the records and extracted data from the most complete report.

### Study selection and data extraction

One reviewer selected potentially eligible studies and a second reviewer verified all included and excluded studies. We reported the identification, exclusion and inclusion of studies in a flowchart (Figure S1). The reviewers determined which of the three review questions each study addressed, using the definitions in Box 1. One reviewer extracted data using a pre-piloted extraction form in an electronic data capture system (REDCap, Vanderbilt University, USA). A second reviewer verified the extracted data using the query system in REDCap. A third reviewer adjudicated on disagreements that could not be resolved by discussion. We contacted study authors for clarification where the study description was insufficient to reach a decision on inclusion or if reported data in the manuscript were internally inconsistent. The extracted variables included, but were not limited to, study design, country and/or region, study setting, population, age, primary outcomes and length of follow-up. From empirical studies, we extracted raw numbers of individuals with the outcome and its relevant denominator. From statistical and mathematical modelling studies we extracted proportions and uncertainty intervals reported by the authors.

The primary outcomes for each review question were: 1. Proportion with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection who did not experience symptoms at all during follow-up; 2. Proportion with SARS-CoV-2 infections who did not have symptoms at the time of testing but developed symptoms during follow-up. 3. Estimated proportion (with uncertainty interval) of SARS-CoV-2 transmission accounted for by people who are asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic.

### Risk of bias in included studies

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias. A third reviewer resolved disagreements. For observational epidemiological studies, we adapted the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Series.10 The adapted tool included items about inclusion criteria, measurement of asymptomatic status, follow-up of course of disease, and availability of numerator and denominator. We added items about selection biases affecting the study, source and target populations from a tool for the assessment of risk of bias in prevalence studies.11 For mathematical modelling studies, we used a tool for assessing the credibility of mathematical modelling studies.12

### Synthesis of the evidence

We used the *metaprop* function from the *meta* package (version 4.11-0)13 in R (version 3.5.1) to display the study findings in forest plots and synthesise their findings. The 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each study are estimated using the Clopper-Pearson method.14 We examined heterogeneity visually in forest plots. We stratified studies according to the methods used to identify people with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and the study setting. To synthesise proportions from comparable studies, in terms of design and population, we used stratified random effects meta-analysis assuming a common heterogeneity parameter across strata. For the overall summary proportion we calculated a prediction interval, to represent the likely range of proportions that would be obtained in subsequent studies conducted in similar settings.15

## Results

Searches for the living evidence database retrieved 2266 records on 25 March, 2020 and a further 5291 when we updated the search on 20 April. We screened 315 potentially eligible records and included 37 (Figure S1).16-52 Of these, two reported on the same study population,16,46 so we linked the records and used data from the most detailed report.16 Data from 31 empirical studies were collected in nine countries: China (21 studies, 1672people);17,19,20,22,25-27,30,31,34-44,48 Japan (two studies, 116) people;16,33 United States of America (two studies, 66 people);18,23 and one study each from France (13 people),21 Germany (two people),47 Greece (39 people),45 Malaysia (four people),32 Thailand (11 people),29 Vietnam (6 people).24 One statistical modelling study that used data collected from all 634 tested passengers on a cruise ship, the Diamond Princess,28 was considered separately from a study that reported on a subset of 104 of the passengers who were hospitalised in Japan.33 The four modelling studies were informed by empirical data from China (four studies)49-52 and Singapore (one study).49 As of 10 May, 2020, 31 of the included records were published and six were preprints.

### Proportion of people with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection

We included 28 studies that reported empirical data16-26,29-36,38,40-44 and one statistical modelling study28 (Table 1). The results of the studies were heterogeneous (data supplement, Figure S2a). We defined six strata, according to the method of selection of asymptomatic status and study setting: contact investigations of single families in which one or more family members was asymptomatic;17 19,22,24,25,30,36,41,42,44 contact investigations, in which the findings of multiple investigations were aggregated;26,38 outbreak investigations in non-family situations;21,23,35,40 screening of a defined group of people;16,20,47 case series of adults admitted to hospital;18,29,33,39,43,48 and case series of children admitted to hospital.31,32,34 Study findings within these strata were more consistent (Figure 1). We considered separately the statistical modelling study of the Diamond Princess cruise ship passengers28 because of the different method of analysis and overlap with the study population reported by Tabata S, et al.33 The main risk of bias in empirical studies was in the selection of people with asymptomatic infection and their enrolment into the study (Figure S4). The source of bias differs according to the setting and is discussed together with the relevant results. Ascertainment of symptom status at the end of follow-up was assessed as adequate in all studies reporting empirical data.

View this table:
[Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/T1)

Table 1. 
Characteristics of studies reporting on proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections

![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/F1.medium.gif)

[Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/F1)

Figure 1. Forest plot of proportion of people with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection
The size of the shaded square is proportional to study size; solid diamond is the summary proportion and 95% confidence interval, estimated from random effects meta-analysis; red line is the prediction interval.

The overall estimate of the proportion of people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 and remain asymptomatic throughout the course of infection was 15% (95% CI 10 to 22%, 28 studies), with a prediction interval of 3 to 55% (Figure 1). The statistical modelling study, based on data from all 634 passengers from the Diamond Princess Cruise ship with RT-PCR positive test results, estimated the true proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections.28 The authors adjusted for the proportion of people who would develop symptoms (right censoring) in a Bayesian framework to estimate that, if all were followed up until the end of the incubation period, the probability of asymptomatic infections would be 17.9% (95% credibility interval, Crl 15.5 to 20.2%).

The summary point estimates of the proportion of people with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection differed according to study methods and setting, although confidence intervals overlapped. The first three strata in Figure 1 involve studies that reported on different types of contact investigation, which start with an identified covid-19 case. The studies reporting on single family clusters (13 estimates from 10 studies in China, n=60) all included at least one asymptomatic person.17,19,22,24,25,30 36,41,42,44 The summary estimate, 26% (95% CI 15 to 41%) overestimates the true proportion of asymptomatic infections because no study in this stratum included clusters in which all family members had symptoms of infection. The summary estimate was lower in two studies in China that reported on close contacts of infected individuals and aggregated data from clusters of both asymptomatic and symptomatic people (7%, 95% CI 2 to 19%).26,38 In neither of these studies was the number of clusters or the proportion of clusters with an asymptomatic individual reported. We included four studies that reported on outbreak investigations arising from a single symptomatic person with covid-19 in a chalet in France,21 a flight from Singapore carrying passengers returning to China,40 a nursing home in the United States of America,23 and a supermarket employee in China.35 The summary estimate of the proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections was 16% (95% CI 7 to 34%).

We included three studies in which SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected through screening of a defined population either evacuated from, or resident in Hubei province, China. Two studies reported on people evacuated from a setting where SARS-CoV-2 transmission was confirmed, irrespective of symptom status (Table 1, Figure 1). Arima Y, et al. reported on 566 Japanese nationals evacuated from Wuhan City.16 Of these, 13 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and four were asymptomatic. The authors reported that after 30 days of follow up, all four remained asymptomatic. Hoehl S, et al. reported on 126 people evacuated from Hubei province and investigated in Germany.47 Two people tested positive for SARS-COV-2, one of whom had mild symptoms of viral infection. Chang L, et al. reported on the results of screening of 7425 donations at blood donation centres in Hubei province. Four positive samples were identified and two of the donors remained asymptomatic.

The remaining nine studies included groups of patients in hospital, six involved adults18,29,33,39,43,48 and three studied children31,32,34 (Table 1, Figure 1). The studies among adults in this stratum were somewhat heterogeneous, both in methods and estimates of proportions of asymptomatic infections. In most studies, the proportion of patients that remained asymptomatic was low. The hospital environment and frequent monitoring might increase the detection and reporting of symptoms. Tabata S, et al. reported the highest proportion in this stratum that remained asymptomatic.33 The authors reported that the patients from the Diamond Princess cruise ship who were in hospital in Japan were not seriously ill and had already remained on board for some time, suggesting a selected population of people likely to remain asymptomatic. In one study, Wang X, et al. included 1012 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in a Fangcang (temporary) hospital in Wuhan, and reported the lowest proportion that remained asymptomatic.39 We did a post hoc sensitivity analysis to examine the influence of this single study, which contributed more than half of all participants for this review question. Exclusion of Wang X et al. resulted in an overall summary proportion of 17% (95% CI 12 to 23%, prediction interval 4 to 48%). In a non-prespecified subgroup analysis, the proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection estimated in hospitalised patients (9%, 95% CI 5 to 17%) was slightly lower than in all other settings (20%, 95% CI 13 to 30%, Figure S2b). In hospitalised children, three studies reported higher proportions of patients remaining asymptomatic31,32,34 than in most studies of hospitalised adults. The point estimates differed, but confidence intervals overlapped (24%, 95% CI 9 to 49% in children compared with 6%, 95% CI 3 to 12% in adults, Figure 1).

### Proportion of pre-symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections

We included 15 studies in which the people with no symptoms of covid-19 at enrolment were followed up (Table 2, Figure 2).16,18,20,22,23,27,32,33,37,39,41,44,45,47,53 Two studies that provided data for contact investigations in review question 1 are considered here with studies of hospitalised adults because the data available to address the two review questions differed.22,44 Three studies addressed only this review question.27,37,45 The proportion that develops symptoms is the proportion of people with pre-symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. The findings from the 15 studies were heterogeneous (Figure S3a), even when categorised according to the method of selection of asymptomatic participants and we did not estimate a summary measure (Figure 2). Studies that followed people with SARS-CoV-2 from the start of infection or date of last exposure would be considered at low risk of bias. For 12 of 15 studies, however, this information was either not reported or could not be determined (Table 2). In six studies, the risk of selection bias was assessed as low (Table S1). In a non-prespecified subgroup analysis, the summary estimates were 67% 95% CI 51 to 80% for studies at lower risk of bias and 38% 95% CI 21 to 58% for those assessed as being at higher risk of bias (Figure S3b). In one study, Tabata S, et al. described a high risk of selection bias resulting in an underestimate of the true proportion developing symptoms. They observed that the passengers from the Diamond Princess cruise ship who were hospitalised in Japan were in general good health had all remained on board for ‘a relatively long time’.33

View this table:
[Table 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/T2)

Table 2. 
Characteristics of studies that measured the proportion of people with SARS-CoV-2 infection that develops symptoms

![Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/F2.medium.gif)

[Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/F2)

Figure 2. Forest plot of proportion with pre-symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection
The size of the shaded square is proportional to study size.

### Contribution of asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infection to SARS-CoV-2 to transmission

We included four mathematical modelling studies (Figure 3).49-52 The models were informed by data from contact investigations in China and Singapore, using information about onset of symptoms in a primary case and a secondary case or about the assumed timing of exposure to estimate the generation time. A generation period shorter than the incubation period of the infector indicates pre-symptomatic transmission. In three studies, the authors analysed empirical data49,50,52 and in one study the author used published estimates.51 In three studies, authors estimated the contribution to SARS-CoV-2 transmission by pre-symptomatic individuals.49,51,52 Ferretti L, et al. estimated the contributions to transmission by both people with true asymptomatic infection and people with pre-symptomatic infection.50 In their baseline scenario, they assumed a fraction of 46% asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections (citing data from the Diamond Princess) and reduced infectiousness from asymptomatic cases. They estimated that asymptomatic transmission 6% (95% credibility interval 0 to 57%) of the total transmission, and pre-symptomatic patients account for 47% (11 to 58%) of the total. They provide a shiny app [ref:link], in which different assumptions can be examined.50 The estimate of pre-symptomatic transmission was consistent with the models of Ganyani, T et al.49 and He X, et al.52 Zhang W examined two scenarios in Wuhan;51 he estimated that 19.7% of SARS-CoV-2 transmission resulted from pre-symptomatic transmission when there was no effective control and up to 79.7% when control measures prevented transmissions after symptom onset, with no uncertainty intervals around the estimates. The credibility of this model was limited by the input data, the absence of assessment of uncertainty and absence of external validation. In one other study, the effects of uncertainty were also limited.49 The data to which the models were fitted were from small samples, in the most cases before lockdown measures were implemented (Figure S5).

![Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/F3.medium.gif)

[Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/F3)

Figure 3. Forest plot of contribution of asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infection to SARS-CoV-2 to transmission from modelling studies

## Discussion

### Summary of main findings

The summary proportion of SARS-CoV-2 that is asymptomatic throughout the course of infection was estimated to be 15% (95% CI 10 to 22%, 28 studies), with a prediction interval of 3 to 55%, in a rapid living systematic review. In 15 studies reporting on people who are pre-symptomatic but who go on to develop symptoms, the results were too heterogeneous to combine. In modelling studies, 40-60% of all SARS-CoV-2 infections are the result of transmission from pre-symptomatic individuals, with a smaller contribution from asymptomatic individuals.

### Strengths and weaknesses

A strength of this review is that the separate review questions distinguish between SARS-CoV-2 infections that remain asymptomatic throughout their course from those that become symptomatic, and we separate proportions of people with infection from their contribution to overall transmission in a population. We only included studies that provided information about follow-up through the course of infection, which allowed reliable assessment about the proportion of asymptomatic people in different settings. In the statistical synthesis of proportions, we used a method that accounts for the binary nature of the data and avoids the normality approximation (weighted logistic regression). We aimed to be as conservative as possible, encompassing the heterogeneity in the results, even when there were few studies within each stratum. This rapid living systematic review follows a published protocol and uses methods to minimise bias whilst increasing the speed of the review process,7 and will be updated regularly using a living evidence database.

Limitations of the review are that we did not consider the possible impact of false negative RT-PCR results, which would underestimate the proportion of asymptomatic infections54, and that the database does not include all sources. The four databases cover the majority of publications and we do not believe that we have missed studies that would change our conclusions.

### Comparison with other reviews

We found one online summary of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection that listed 21 articles found through searches of five electronic databases.55 There was no published protocol. The authors did not distinguish between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infection and present cross-sectional studies alongside longitudinal studies and mathematical modelling studies. The review gave a wide range (5 to 80%) of infections that might be asymptomatic. The advantage of our review is that it is a systematic review in which included studies followed participants after enrolment for an adequate length for authors to have observed the onset of symptoms, we investigated heterogeneity between studies and we quantified the estimated proportion of asymptomatic infection in a meta-analysis.

### Interpretation

The findings from this systematic review do not support the claim that a large majority of SARS-CoV-2 infections are asymptomatic.2 We estimated that the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections that is asymptomatic throughout the course of infection is 15% (95% CI 10 to 22%). The wider prediction interval reflects the heterogeneity between studies and indicates that future studies with similar study designs and in similar settings will estimate a proportion of asymptomatic infections from 4 to 55%. The summary estimate is consistent with a statistical modelling study by Mizumoto K, et al., which accounted for right-censoring.28 Most included studies were not designed to estimate the proportion of asymptomatic infections. At this stage of a pandemic of a new infectious disease, there is likely publication bias, with rapid publication of case reports of newsworthy findings, such as person-to person transmission by asymptomatic individuals. The inclusion of family contact investigations with at least one asymptomatic individual would overestimate the true proportion of asymptomatic infections, but these studies accounted for only 60 of 1860 included participants so they did not influence the overall estimate. The denominator of all contact investigations is not known, but in two studies that analysed data from all clusters, irrespective of symptom status, the proportion with asymptomatic infection was lower.26,38 The large number of case reports of novel manifestations of disease was also a feature of the Zika epidemic. Analysis of published studies showed that estimates of the duration of infection decreased over time as less biased studies were published.56 Transmission from pre-symptomatic individuals has been found to occur one to three days before symptom onset.57 The degree of transmissibility of asymptomatic infection is not known, but it has been reported.17 We were unable to determine the proportion of people who are pre-symptomatic from the included studies. Most studies did not have enough information to determine the stage of infection at study entry. Studies assessed as being at low risk of bias did not select participants according to symptom status. In post-hoc analysis, the proportion of people progressing to symptomatic infection was higher in studies at lower risk of bias, but confidence intervals in the sub-groups overlapped. In principle, the proportion of individuals that will develop symptoms can be derived by subtraction from the estimated proportion with true asymptomatic infections; from our review, we would estimate that 85% (95% CI 78 to 90%) of individuals with SARS-CoV-2 will develop symptoms.

Only modelling studies can determine the overall contribution to SARS-CoV-2 transmission of individuals with asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infection at the population level because of the non-linear dynamics of infection transmission. In the studies included in this review, four estimates from three studies found that 40-60% of all SARS-CoV-2 infections are the result of transmission whilst pre-symptomatic, with a smaller contribution from asymptomatic infections.49,50,52 The estimates from the fourth study appear different, but are based on imprecise parameter estimates with no uncertainty intervals. Our finding differs from a modelling study that has been interpreted as showing that up to 90% of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is asymptomatic.58 Li R, et al. found that 86% of infections were defined as undocumented,58 but it appears that this proportion is a composite of asymptomatic infections, infections that were symptomatic and diagnosed but unreported, and infections that were mild and undiagnosed.

### Implications and unanswered questions

The findings from this living systematic review, with a relatively low estimated proportion of individuals with true asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, together with findings from modelling studies of an intermediate contribution of pre-symptomatic to overall SARS-CoV-2 epidemics,49,50 reinforce the challenges for controlling transmission. A combination of prevention measures, with enhanced hand and respiratory hygiene, testing tracing and isolation strategies and social distancing, will continue to be needed. Social distancing measures will need to be sustained at some level because droplet transmission from close contact with people with asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infection occurs. Easing of restrictions will, however, only be possible with wide access to testing, contact tracing and rapid isolation of infected individuals. Quarantine of close contacts is also essential to prevent onward transmission during asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic periods of those that have become infected. Digital, proximity tracing will need to supplement classical contact tracing to speed up detection of contacts to interrupt transmission during the pre-symptomatic phase.50,59 Future studies to improve determination of the true proportion of asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infection should ensure careful definitions and documentation of symptom status and adequate follow-up. Serological studies, with prospective documentation of symptom status should improve certainty around the estimates of the proportions of asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. This living rapid systematic review will be updated in three months, with continuously updated searches. The findings of this systematic review of publications early in the pandemic suggests that most SARS-CoV-2 infections are not asymptomatic throughout the course of infection.

## Contributors

DCB, DEG and MC contributed equally to the study. Conception of idea and lead investigator (NL); search strategy design (MC); abstract and full text screening (DB, DEG, MC, SH, HI, MI and NL); data extraction (DB, DEG, MC, SH, HI, MI and NL); risk of bias assessment (DB, DEG, MC and NL); statistical analysis (MC, GS and NL); data interpretation (DB, DEG, MC, SH, HI, GS and NL); manuscript writing and revision (DB, DEG, MC, SH, HI, GS, MI and NL); guarantor (NL). The corresponding author attests that all listed authors meet authorship criteria and that no others meeting the criteria have been omitted.

## Funding

Swiss National Science Foundation, project number 320030_176233; European Union Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, project EpiPose (No 101003688).

## Competing Interests

All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at [www.icmje.org/coi\_disclosure.pdf](http://www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf) and declare: GS has participated in two scientific meetings for Merck and Biogen. NL discloses support from the Swiss National Science Foundation and the European Union Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme. All other authors declare no competing interests, or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

#### Key messages

##### What is already known on this topic

There is disagreement about the proportion of people infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) who remain asymptomatic throughout the course of infection

People with SARS-CoV-2 infection can transmit the virus in a pre-symptomatic phase, before they go on to develop symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19)

Evidence about this topic needs to be reviewed systematically in studies with enough follow-up time to find out whether covid-19 symptoms develop or not

##### What this study adds

Clear definitions of asymptomatic infection and pre-symptomatic infection will reduce misinterpretation of study findings

Our systematic review suggests that most SARS-CoV-2 infections are not asymptomatic throughout the course of infection; we estimate that 15% (95% confidence interval 10 to 22%) of people with SARS-CoV-2 remain asymptomatic

The results of mathematical modelling studies of the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection suggest that transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by people with pre-symptomatic infection account for around 40 to 60% of all infections

## Data Availability

All data are fully available

View this table:
[Table3](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/T3)

View this table:
[Table4](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/T4)

View this table:
[Table5](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/24/2020.04.25.20079103/T5)

*   Received April 25, 2020.
*   Revision received May 22, 2020.
*   Accepted May 24, 2020.


*   © 2020, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), CC BY 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

## References

1.  1.World Health Organization. Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), 16-24 February 2020. Geneva, 2020.
    
    

2.  2.Day M. Covid-19: four fifths of cases are asymptomatic, China figures indicate. BMJ 2020;369:m1375. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m1375 [published Online First: 2020/04/04]
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE4OiIzNjkvYXByMDJfMTEvbTEzNzUiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMC8wNS8yNC8yMDIwLjA0LjI1LjIwMDc5MTAzLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

3.  3.Sutton D, Fuchs K, D’Alton M, et al. Universal Screening for SARS-CoV-2 in Women Admitted for Delivery. N Engl J Med 2020 doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2009316 [published Online First: 2020/04/14]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMc2009316&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32283004&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

4.  4.Low N, Egli-Gany D, Hossmann S, et al. Re: Covid-19: four fifths of cases are asymptomatic, China figures indicate 2020 [Available from: [https://www.bmi.com/content/369/bmi.m1375/rr-5](https://www.bmi.com/content/369/bmi.m1375/rr-5) accessed 25.04.2020.
    
    

5.  5.World Health Organization. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) situation report - 73. Geneva, 2020.
    
    

6.  6.Lipsitch M, Swerdlow DL, Finelli L. Defining the Epidemiology of Covid-19 - Studies Needed. N Engl J Med 2020;382(13):1194–96. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp2002125 [published Online First: 2020/02/20]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMp2002125&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32074416&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

7.  7.Tricco AC, Langlois EV, Straus SE, et al. Rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems: a practical guide. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2017.
    
    

8.  8.Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2009;6(7):e1000100.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19621070&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

9.  9.Counotte M, Imeri H, Ipekci M, et al. COVID-19 living evidence Bern: Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern; 2020 [Covid-19 living evidence landing page]. Available from: [https://ispmbern.github.io/covid-19/living-review/](https://ispmbern.github.io/covid-19/living-review/) accessed 09.05.2020 2020.
    
    

10. 10.Joanna Briggs Institute. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for use in JBI systematic reviews–checklist for case series. Adelaide, 2017.
    
    

11. 11.Boyle MH. Guidelines for evaluating prevalence studies. Evidence-Based Mental Health 1998;1(2):37–40.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6ODoiZWJtZW50YWwiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6NjoiMS8yLzM3IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDUvMjQvMjAyMC4wNC4yNS4yMDA3OTEwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

12. 12.Jaime Caro J, Eddy DM, Kan H, et al. Questionnaire to assess relevance and credibility of modeling studies for informing health care decision making: an ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force report. Value Health 2014;17(2):174–82. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.01.003
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jval.2014.01.003&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24636375&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000333346600004&link_type=ISI) 

13. 13.Balduzzi S, Rucker G, Schwarzer G. How to perform a meta-analysis with R: a practical tutorial. Evidence-Based Mental Health 2019;22(4):153–60. doi: 10.1136/ebmental-2019-300117 [published Online First: 2019/09/30]
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6ODoiZWJtZW50YWwiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6ODoiMjIvNC8xNTMiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMC8wNS8yNC8yMDIwLjA0LjI1LjIwMDc5MTAzLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

14. 14.Newcombe RG. Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods. Stat Med 1998;17(8):857–72.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980430)17:8<857::AID-SIM777>3.0.CO;2-E&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=9595616&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000073221800005&link_type=ISI) 

15. 15.Riley RD, Higgins JP, Deeks JJ. Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses. BMJ 2011;342:d549.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE2OiIzNDIvZmViMTBfMi9kNTQ5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDUvMjQvMjAyMC4wNC4yNS4yMDA3OTEwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

16. 16.Arima Y, Shimada T, Suzuki M, et al. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection among Returnees to Japan from Wuhan, China, 2020. Emerg Infect Dis 2020;26(7) doi: 10.3201/eid2607.200994 [published Online First: 2020/04/11]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3201/eid2607.200994&link_type=DOI) 

17. 17.Bai Y, Yao L, Wei T, et al. Presumed Asymptomatic Carrier Transmission of COVID-19. JAMA 2020;54():E017. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.2565
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.2020.2565&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32083643&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

18. 18.Breslin N, Baptiste C, Gyamfi-Bannerman C, et al. COVID-19 infection among asymptomatic and symptomatic pregnant women: Two weeks of confirmed presentations to an affiliated pair of New York City hospitals. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2020:100118. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100118 [published Online First: 2020/04/16]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100118&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32292903&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

19. 19.Chan JF, Yuan S, Kok KH, et al. A familial cluster of pneumonia associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus indicating person-to-person transmission: a study of a family cluster. Lancet 2020;395(10223):514–23. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30154-9 [published Online First: 2020/01/28]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30154-9&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=31986261&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

20. 20.Chang L, Zhao L, Gong H, et al. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 RNA Detected in Blood Donations. Emerg Infect Dis 2020;26(7) doi: 10.3201/eid2607.200839 [published Online First: 2020/04/04]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3201/eid2607.200839&link_type=DOI) 

21. 21.Danis K, Epaulard O, Benet T, et al. Cluster of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) in the French Alps, 2020. Clin Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa424 [published Online First: 2020/04/12]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/cid/ciaa424&link_type=DOI) 

22. 22.Hu Z, Song C, Xu C, et al. Clinical characteristics of 24 asymptomatic infections with COVID-19 screened among close contacts in Nanjing, China. Sci China Life Sci 2020;63(5):706–11. doi: 10.1007/s11427-020-1661-4 [published Online First: 2020/03/09]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s11427-020-1661-4&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32146694&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

23. 23.Kimball A, Hatfield KM, Arons M, et al. Asymptomatic and Presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infections in Residents of a Long-Term Care Skilled Nursing Facility - King County, Washington, March 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020;69(13):377–81. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6913e1 [published Online First: 2020/04/03]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.15585/mmwr.mm6913e1&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32240128&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

24. 24.Le TQM, Takemura T, Moi ML, et al. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Shedding by Travelers, Vietnam, 2020. Emerg Infect Dis 2020;26(7) doi: 10.3201/eid2607.200591 [published Online First: 2020/04/03]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3201/eid2607.200591&link_type=DOI) 

25. 25.Liao J, Fan S, Chen J, et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in adolescents and young adults. *medRxiv* 2020 doi: 10.1101/2020.03.10.20032136
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyMC4wMy4xMC4yMDAzMjEzNnYxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDUvMjQvMjAyMC4wNC4yNS4yMDA3OTEwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

26. 26.Luo L, Liu D, Liao X-l, et al. Modes of contact and risk of transmission in COVID-19 among close contacts. *medRxiv* 2020 doi: 10.1101/2020.03.24.20042606
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyMC4wMy4yNC4yMDA0MjYwNnYxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDUvMjQvMjAyMC4wNC4yNS4yMDA3OTEwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

27. 27.Meng H, Xiong R, He R, et al. CT imaging and clinical course of asymptomatic cases with COVID-19 pneumonia at admission in Wuhan, China. J Infect 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.04.004 [published Online First: 2020/04/16]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.04.004&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32294504&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

28. 28.Mizumoto K, Kagaya K, Zarebski A, et al. Estimating the asymptomatic proportion of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases on board the Diamond Princess cruise ship, Yokohama, Japan, 2020. Euro Surveill 2020;25(10) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.10.2000180 [published Online First: 2020/03/19]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.10.2000180&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32183930&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

29. 29.Pongpirul WA, Mott JA, Woodring JV, et al. Clinical Characteristics of Patients Hospitalized with Coronavirus Disease, Thailand. Emerg Infect Dis 2020;26(7) doi: 10.3201/eid2607.200598 [published Online First: 2020/04/09]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3201/eid2607.200598&link_type=DOI) 

30. 30.Qian G, Yang N, Ma AHY, et al. A COVID-19 Transmission within a family cluster by presymptomatic infectors in China. Clin Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa316
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/cid/ciaa316&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32201889&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

31. 31.Qiu H, Wu J, Hong L, et al. Clinical and epidemiological features of 36 children with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Zhejiang, China: an observational cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30198-5 [published Online First: 2020/03/30]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30198-5&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

32. 32.See KC, Liew SM, Ng DCE, et al. COVID-19: Four Paediatric Cases in Malaysia. Int J Infect Dis 2020;94:125–27. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.03.049 [published Online First: 2020/04/19]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ijid.2020.03.049&link_type=DOI) 

33. 33.Tabata S, Imai K, Kawano S, et al. Non-severe vs severe symptomatic COVID-19: 104 cases from the outbreak on the cruise ship ‘Diamond Princess’ in Japan. medRxiv 2020 doi: 10.1101/2020.03.18.20038125
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyMC4wMy4xOC4yMDAzODEyNXYyIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDUvMjQvMjAyMC4wNC4yNS4yMDA3OTEwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

34. 34.Tan YP, Tan BY, Pan J, et al. Epidemiologic and clinical characteristics of 10 children with coronavirus disease 2019 in Changsha, China. J Clin Virol 2020;127:104353. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104353 [published Online First: 2020/04/18]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104353&link_type=DOI) 

35. 35.Tian S, Wu M, Chang Z, et al. Epidemiological investigation and intergenerational clinical characteristics of 24 COVID-19 patients associated with supermarket cluster. *medRxiv* 2020 doi: 10.1101/2020.04.11.20058891
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyMC4wNC4xMS4yMDA1ODg5MXYxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDUvMjQvMjAyMC4wNC4yNS4yMDA3OTEwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

36. 36.Tong ZD, Tang A, Li KF, et al. Potential Presymptomatic Transmission of SARS-CoV-2, Zhejiang Province, China, 2020. Emerg Infect Dis 2020;26(5):1052–54. doi: 10.3201/eid2605.200198 [published Online First: 2020/02/25]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3201/eid2605.200198&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32091386&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

37. 37.Wang Y, Liu Y, Liu L, et al. Clinical outcome of 55 asymptomatic cases at the time of hospital admission infected with SARS-Coronavirus-2 in Shenzhen, China. J Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiaa119 [published Online First: 2020/03/18]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/infdis/jiaa119&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

38. 38.Wang Z, Ma W, Zheng X, et al. Household transmission of SARS-CoV-2. J Infect 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.03.040 [published Online First: 2020/04/14]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.03.040&link_type=DOI) 

39. 39.Wang X, Fang J, Zhu Y, et al. Clinical characteristics of non-critically ill patients with novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) in a Fangcang Hospital. Clin Microbiol Infect 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.03.032 [published Online First: 2020/04/07]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.cmi.2020.03.032&link_type=DOI) 

40. 40.Yang N, Shen Y, Shi C, et al. In-flight Transmission Cluster of COVID-19: A Retrospective Case Series. *medRxiv* 2020 doi: 10.1101/2020.03.28.20040097
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyMC4wMy4yOC4yMDA0MDA5N3YxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDUvMjQvMjAyMC4wNC4yNS4yMDA3OTEwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

41. 41.Ye F, Xu S, Rong Z, et al. Delivery of infection from asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19 in a familial cluster. Int J Infect Dis 2020;94:133–38. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.03.042 [published Online First: 2020/04/06]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ijid.2020.03.042&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32247826&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

42. 42.Zhang J, Tian S, Lou J, et al. Familial cluster of COVID-19 infection from an asymptomatic. Crit Care 2020;24 doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-2817-7
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s13054-020-2817-7&link_type=DOI) 

43. 43.Zhou X, Li Y, Li T, et al. Follow-up of asymptomatic patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clin Microbiol Infect 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.03.024 [published Online First: 2020/04/03]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.cmi.2020.03.024&link_type=DOI) 

44. 44.Luo SH, Liu W, Liu ZJ, et al. A confirmed asymptomatic carrier of 2019 novel coronavirus. Chin Med J (Engl) 2020;133(9):1123–25. doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000000798 [published Online First: 2020/03/10]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/CM9.0000000000000798&link_type=DOI) 

45. 45.Lytras T, Dellis G, Flountzi A, et al. High prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in repatriation flights to Greece from three European countries. J Travel Med 2020 doi: 10.1093/jtm/taaa054 [published Online First: 2020/04/17]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/jtm/taaa054&link_type=DOI) 

46. 46.Nishiura H, Kobayashi T, Suzuki A, et al. Estimation of the asymptomatic ratio of novel coronavirus infections (COVID-19). Int J Infect Dis 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.03.020
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ijid.2020.03.020&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

47. 47.Hoehl S, Rabenau H, Berger A, et al. Evidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Returning Travelers from Wuhan, China. N Engl J Med 2020;382(13):1278–80. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2001899 [published Online First: 2020/02/19]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMc2001899&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32069388&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

48. 48.Zou L, Ruan F, Huang M, et al. SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in Upper Respiratory Specimens of Infected Patients. N Engl J Med 2020;382(12):1177–79. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2001737 [published Online First: 2020/02/20]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMc2001737&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32074444&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

49. 49.Ganyani T, Kremer C, Chen D, et al. Estimating the generation interval for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) based on symptom onset data, March 2020. Euro Surveill 2020;25(17):2020.03.05.20031815. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.17.2000257 [published Online First: 2020/05/07]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.17.2000257&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=7201952&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

50. 50.Ferretti L, Wymant C, Kendall M, et al. Quantifying SARS-CoV-2 transmission suggests epidemic control with digital contact tracing. Science 2020;368(6491):2020.03.08.20032946. doi: 10.1126/science.abb6936 [published Online First: 2020/04/03]
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Mzoic2NpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE3OiIzNjgvNjQ5MS9lYWJiNjkzNiI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzA1LzI0LzIwMjAuMDQuMjUuMjAwNzkxMDMuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

51. 51.Zhang W. Estimating the presymptomatic transmission of COVID19 using incubation period and serial interval data. *medRxiv* 2020 doi: 10.1101/2020.04.02.20051318
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyMC4wNC4wMi4yMDA1MTMxOHYxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDUvMjQvMjAyMC4wNC4yNS4yMDA3OTEwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

52. 52.He X, Lau EHY, Wu P, et al. Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19. Nat Med 2020 doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-0869-5 [published Online First: 2020/04/17]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41591-020-0869-5&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32296168&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

53. 53.Zhou C. Evaluating new evidence in the early dynamics of the novel coronavirus COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China with real time domestic traffic and potential asymptomatic transmissions. *medRxiv* 2020 doi: 10.1101/2020.02.15.20023440
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyMC4wMi4xNS4yMDAyMzQ0MHYyIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDUvMjQvMjAyMC4wNC4yNS4yMDA3OTEwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

54. 54.Kucirka LM, Lauer SA, Laeyendecker O, et al. Variation in False-Negative Rate of Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction–Based SARS-CoV-2 Tests by Time Since Exposure. Annals of Internal Medicine 2020 doi: 10.7326/M20-1495
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7326/M20-1495&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32422057&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

55. 55.Heneghan C, Brassey J, Jefferson T. COVID-19: What proportion are asymptomatic? Oxford: Centre for Evidence Based Medicine; 2020 [updated 06.04.2020. Available from: [https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-19-what-proportion-are-asymptomatic/](https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-19-what-proportion-are-asymptomatic/) accessed 23.04.2020.
    
    

56. 56.Counotte MJ, Meili KW, Low N. Emergence of evidence during disease outbreaks: lessons learnt from the Zika virus outbreak. *medRxiv* 2020 doi: 10.1101/2020.03.16.20036806 [published Online First: 18.03.2020]
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyMC4wMy4xNi4yMDAzNjgwNnYxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDUvMjQvMjAyMC4wNC4yNS4yMDA3OTEwMy5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

57. 57.Wei WE, Li Z, Chiew CJ, et al. Presymptomatic Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 - Singapore, January 23-March 16, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020;69:411–15. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6914e1
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.15585/mmwr.mm6914e1&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32271722&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F05%2F24%2F2020.04.25.20079103.atom) 

58. 58.Li R, Pei S, Chen B, et al. Substantial undocumented infection facilitates the rapid dissemination of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Science 2020;368(6490):489–93. doi: 10.1126/science.abb3221 [published Online First: 2020/03/18]
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Mzoic2NpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEyOiIzNjgvNjQ5MC80ODkiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMC8wNS8yNC8yMDIwLjA0LjI1LjIwMDc5MTAzLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

59. 59.Salathe M, Althaus CL, Neher R, et al. COVID-19 epidemic in Switzerland: on the importance of testing, contact tracing and isolation. Swiss Med Wkly 2020;150:w20225. doi: 10.4414/smw.2020.20225 [published Online First: 2020/03/20]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.4414/smw.2020.20225&link_type=DOI)