Abstract
An important unknown during the COVID-19 pandemic has been the infection-fatality rate (IFR). This differs from the case-fatality rate (CFR) as an estimate of the number of deaths as a proportion of the total number of cases, including those who are mild and asymptomatic. While the CFR is extremely valuable for experts, IFR is increasingly being called for by policy-makers and the lay public as an estimate of the overall mortality from COVID-19.
Methods Pubmed, Medline, SSRN, and Medrxiv were searched using a set of terms and Boolean operators on 25/04/2020 and re-searched 14/05/2020, 21/05/2020, and 16/06/2020. Articles were screened for inclusion by both authors. Meta-analysis was performed in Stata 15.1 using the metan command, based on IFR and confidence intervals extracted from each study. Google/Google Scholar was used to assess the grey literature relating to government reports.
Results After exclusions, there were 24 estimates of IFR included in the final meta-analysis, from a wide range of countries, published between February and June 2020.
The meta-analysis demonstrated a point-estimate of IFR of 0.68% (0.53-0.82%) with high heterogeneity (p<0.001).
Conclusion Based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of published evidence on COVID-19 until May, 2020, the IFR of the disease across populations is 0.68% (0.53-0.82%). However, due to very high heterogeneity in the meta-analysis, it is difficult to know if this represents the ‘true’ point estimate. It is likely that, due to age and perhaps underlying comorbidities in the population, different places will experience different IFRs due to the disease. Given issues with mortality recording, it is also likely that this represents an underestimate of the true IFR figure. More research looking at age-stratified IFR is urgently needed to inform policy-making on this front.
Key messages
– COVID-19 infection-fatality rate (IFR) is an important statistic for policy about the disease
– Published estimates vary, with a ‘true’ fatality rate hard to calculate
– Systematically reviewing the literature and meta-analyzing the results shows an IFR of 0.68% (0.53-0.82%)
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No funding was received for this article
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
None
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data and code available from authors on request
