Abstract
This paper assesses the age specificity of the infection fatality rate (IFR) for COVID-19 using seroprevalence results from eight national studies (Belgium, England, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden), fifteen seroprevalence studies of specific locations in Europe and the United States, and three countries (Iceland, New Zealand, and Republic of Korea) that have engaged in comprehensive tracking and tracing of COVID-19 infections. The estimated IFR is close to zero for younger adults but rises exponentially with age, reaching about 0.3% for ages 50-59, 1.3% for ages 60-69, 4% for ages 70-79, 10% for ages 80-89. Our findings indicate that COVID-19 is not just dangerous for the elderly and infirm but also for healthy middle-aged adults. Consequently, the overall IFR for a given location is intrinsically linked to the age-specific pattern of infections, and hence protecting vulnerable age groups could substantially reduce the incidence of mortality.
Objective Determine age-specific infection fatality rates for COVID-19 to inform public health policies and communications that help protect vulnerable age groups.
Methods Studies of COVID-19 prevalence were collected by conducting an online search of published articles, preprints, and government reports. A total of 74 studies were reviewed in depth and screened. Studies of 26 locations satisfied the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Age-specific IFRs were computed using the prevalence data in conjunction with reported fatalities four weeks after the midpoint date of the study, reflecting typical lags in fatalities and reporting. Meta-regression procedures in Stata were used to analyze IFR by age. The meta-regression results were compared with age-specific IFRs computed from four other studies -- an “out-of-sample” exercise commonly used in assessing validity of forecast models.
Results Our analysis finds a exponential relationship between age and IFR for COVID-19. The estimated age-specific IFRs are close to zero for children and younger adults but rise to about 0.3% for ages 50-59, 1.3% for ages 60-69, and 4% for ages 70-79, 15% for ages 80-89, and 25% for ages 90 and above. Nearly all of the age-specific IFRs included in the meta-analysis fall within the 95% prediction interval of the meta-regression.
Discussion These results indicate that COVID-19 is hazardous not only for the elderly but for middle-aged adults, for whom the infection fatality rate is more than 50 times greater than the annualized risk of a fatal automobile accident. Moreover, the overall IFR for COVID-19 should not be viewed as a fixed parameter but is intrinsically linked to the age-specific pattern of infections. Consequently, individual and collective efforts that minimize infections in older adults could substantially decrease total deaths.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received for this research.
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:
This study is a meta-analysis using information from publicly available studies (published articles, Medrxiv preprints, and government reports).
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
Footnotes
Meta-analysis has been updated to incorporate four new national seroprevalence studies (England, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal) and three new studies of U.S. locations (Atlanta, Indiana, and Salt Lake City). The analysis now includes forest plots and assessment of geographical variation in population IFRs.
Data Availability
This study is a meta-analysis using information from published articles, preprints, and government reports; all sources are listed in the bibliography with active URLs. The data and Stata code used in performing the meta-regression analysis are provided as Supplementary Materials.
