Volume 21, Number 5—May 2015
Dispatch
Transmission Potential of Influenza A(H7N9) Virus, China, 2013–2014
Table
Estimates of human-to-human transmission and effectiveness of live bird market closures, China, 2013–2014*
| Region, outbreak wave | Total no. cases | R0 (95% CrI) | Human-to-human transmission, no. cases (95% CrI) | Hazard reduction, % (95% CrI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shanghai, first |
29 |
0.32 (0.06–0.60) |
11.0 (2.3–14.8) |
99 (95–100) |
| Jiangsu | ||||
| First | 23 | 0.24 (0.03–0.69) | 6.7 (2.0–12.2) | 97 (80–100) |
| Second |
26 |
0.13 (0.01–0.41) |
2.9 (0.1–8.7) |
NC |
| Zhejiang | ||||
| First | 46 | 0.06 (0.00–0.25) | 3.8 (0.8–12.4) | 99 (97–100) |
| Second |
92 |
0.35 (0.15–0.65) |
32.5 (17.3–48.9) |
97 (92–99) |
| Guangdong, second | 103 | 0.16 (0.01–0.54) | 16.7 (1.0–48.6) | 73 (53–89) |
*A serial interval of 7 days was assumed. For sensitivity analysis, see Technical Appendix. CrI, credible interval; NC, not calculated; R0, reproduction number (average number of secondary cases generated by a typical infectious host in a fully susceptible population).
1These authors contributed equally to this article.
Page created: April 17, 2015
Page updated: April 17, 2015
Page reviewed: April 17, 2015
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.