ArticleJCI insight2020
Characteristics and diagnosis rate of 5630 subjects receiving SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid tests from Wuhan, China.
Article in JCI insight, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Estimate false-negative RT-PCR rates for SARS-CoV-2. A systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of clinical investigation · 2022Pooled it
- Children's role in the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of early surveillance data on susceptibility, severity, and transmissibility.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- Demographic risk factors for COVID-19 infection, severity, ICU admission and death: a meta-analysis of 59 studies.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through breast milk and breastfeeding: a living systematic review.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Acute cerebrovascular events and inflammatory markers associated with COVID-19: An observational study.Journal of medicine and life · 2023Observational
- A multiplex method for detection of SARS-CoV-2 variants based on MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry.Biosafety and health · 2023Article
- Using a 29-mRNA Host Response Classifier To Detect Bacterial Coinfections and Predict Outcomes in COVID-19 Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Detection of Viral Infection and Bacterial Coinfection and Superinfection in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department Using the 29-mRNA Host Response Classifier IMX-BVN-3: A Multicenter Study.Open forum infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Detection of bacterial co-infections and prediction of fatal outcomes in COVID-19 patients presenting to the emergency department using a 29 mRNA host response classifier.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2022Article
- Epidemiologic Profile of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection in Brazil During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Epidemiological Study.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Neurosurgery resumption in Wuhan during the early post-epidemic period: what should we pay attention to?Neurosurgical review · 2021Article
- Prevalence of and factors associated with COVID-19 diagnosis in symptomatic patients followed in general practices in Germany between March 2020 and March 2021.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2021Article
- Risk of acute pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 pneumonia compared to community-acquired pneumonia: a retrospective case-control study.Clinical radiology · 2021Article
- PfAgo-based detection of SARS-CoV-2.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2021Article
- Risk factors for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers during April 2020 in a UK hospital testing programme.EClinicalMedicine · 2020Article
- Risk Assessment and Prevention of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Transmission for Hospitalized Urological Patients After the COVID-19 Pandemic in Wuhan, China.European urology open science · 2020Article
- Rapid response infrastructure for pandemic preparedness in a tertiary care hospital: lessons learned from the COVID-19 outbreak in Cologne, Germany, February to March 2020.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2020Article
- A comparison of COVID-19, SARS and MERS.PeerJ · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUNDThe severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused a novel viral pneumonia (COVID-19), which is rapidly spreading throughout the world. The positive result of nucleic acid test is a golden criterion to confirm SARS-CoV-2 infection, but the detection features remain unclear.METHODSWe performed a retrospective analysis in 5630 high-risk individuals receiving SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid tests in Wuhan, China, and investigated their characteristics and diagnosis rates.RESULTSThe overall diagnosis rate was 34.7% (1952/5630). Male (P = 0.025) and older populations (P = 2.525 × 10-39) were at significantly higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. People were generally susceptible, and most cases concentrated in people of 30-79 years. Furthermore, we investigated the association between diagnosis rate and the amount of testing in 501 subjects. Results revealed a 1.27-fold improvement (from 27.9% to 35.5%) of diagnosis rate from testing once to twice (P = 5.847 × 10-9) and a 1.43-fold improvement (from 27.9% to 39.9%) from testing once to 3 times (P = 7.797 × 10-14). More than 3 testing administrations was not helpful for further improvement. However, this improvement was not observed in subjects with pneumonia (P = 0.097).CONCLUSIONAll populations are susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and male and older-aged populations are at significantly higher risk. Increasing the amount of testing could significantly improve diagnosis rates, except for subjects with pneumonia. It is recommended to test twice in those high-risk individuals whose results are negative the first time, and performing 3 tests is better, if possible.FUNDINGThis work was supported by National Mega Project on Major Infectious Disease Prevention (no. 2017ZX10103005-007) and National Key Research and Development Program of China (no. 2018YFE0204500).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.