Tracing the origin of Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2): A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Issue 12 (7th September 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Thakur, Nagendra; Das, Sayak; Kumar, Swatantra; Maurya, Vimal K.; Dhama, Kuldeep; Paweska, Janusz T.; Abdel‐Moneim, Ahmed S.; Jain, Amita; Tripathi, Anil K.; Puri, Bipin; Saxena, Shailendra K.
• Is Part Of: Journal of medical virology. Volume 94:Issue 12(2022)
• Page Start: 5766
• Page End: 5779
• Publication Date: 2022-09-07
• Subjects: COVID‐19 -- laboratory incidence -- MERS‐CoV -- origin -- SARS‐CoV -- SARS‐CoV‐2 -- zoonotic; Virology -- Periodicals; 616
• DOI: 10.1002/jmv.28060
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0146-6615

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the study was to trace and understand the origin of Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) through various available literatures and accessible databases. Although the world enters the third year of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, health and socioeconomic impacts continue to mount, the origin and mechanisms of spill‐over of the SARS‐CoV‐2 into humans remain elusive. Therefore, a systematic review of the literature was performed that showcased the integrated information obtained through manual searches, digital databases (PubMed, CINAHL, and MEDLINE) searches, and searches from legitimate publications (1966–2022), followed by meta‐analysis. Our systematic analysis data proposed three postulated hypotheses concerning the origin of the SARS‐CoV‐2, which include zoonotic origin (Z), laboratory origin (L), and obscure origin (O). Despite the fact that the zoonotic origin for SARS‐CoV‐2 has not been conclusively identified to date, our data suggest a zoonotic origin, in contrast to some alternative concepts, including the probability of a laboratory incident or leak. Our data exhibit that zoonotic origin (Z) has higher evidence‐based support as compared to laboratory origin (L). Importantly, based on all the studies included, we generated the forest plot with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the risk ratio estimates. Our meta‐analysis further supports the zoonotic origin of SARS/SARS‐CoV‐2 in the included studies.