Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32877792›Full record

ArticleArchives of gerontology and geriatrics

Death risk stratification in elderly patients with covid-19. A comparative cohort study in nursing homes outbreaks.

M Bernabeu-Wittel, J E Ternero-Vega, P Díaz-Jiménez, C Conde-Guzmán, M D Nieto-Martín, L Moreno-Gaviño, J Delgado-Cuesta, M Rincón-Gómez, L Giménez-Miranda, M D Navarro-Amuedo and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of gerontology and geriatrics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Risk Factors for COVID-19 Morbidity and Mortality in Institutionalised Elderly People.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Safety and Efficacy of Convalescent Plasma in Elderly COVID-19 Patients: The RESCUE Trial.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M Bernabeu-WittelInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain; Department of Medicine, University of Seville, Spain. Electronic address: https://mobile.twitter.com/mximowittel?lang=en.
J E Ternero-VegaInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
P Díaz-JiménezInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
C Conde-GuzmánInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
M D Nieto-MartínInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
L Moreno-GaviñoInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
J Delgado-CuestaInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
M Rincón-GómezInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
L Giménez-MirandaInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
M D Navarro-AmuedoInfectious Diseases Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
M M Muñoz-GarcíaBermejales Primary Care Center, Primary Care District of Seville, Spain.
S Calzón-FernándezEpidemiology and Public Health Department, Primary Care District of Seville, Spain.
M Ollero-BaturoneInternal Medicine Department, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.
Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío · ESMadrid Health Service · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Elderly people are more severely affected by COVID-19. Nevertheless scarce information about specific prognostic scores for this population is available. The main objective was to compare the accuracy of recently developed COVID-19 prognostic scores to that of CURB-65, Charlson and PROFUND indices in a cohort of 272 elderly patients from four nursing homes, affected by COVID-19. Accuracy was measured by calibration (calibration curves and Hosmer-Lemeshov (H-L) test), and discriminative power (area under the receiver operation curve (AUC-ROC). Negative and positive predictive values (NPV and PPV) were also obtained. Overall mortality rate was 22.4 %. Only ACP and Shi et al. out of 10 specific COVID-19 indices could be assessed. All indices but CURB-65 showed a good calibration by H-L test, whilst PROFUND, ACP and CURB-65 showed best results in calibration curves. Only CURB-65 (AUC-ROC = 0.81 [0.75-0.87])) and PROFUND (AUC-ROC = 0.67 [0.6-0.75])) showed good discrimination power. The highest NPV was obtained by CURB-65 (95 % [90-98%]), PROFUND (93 % [77-98%]), and their combination (100 % [82-100%]); whereas CURB-65 (74 % [51-88%]), and its combination with PROFUND (80 % [50-94%]) showed highest PPV. PROFUND and CURB-65 indices showed the highest accuracy in predicting death-risk of elderly patients affected by COVID-19, whereas Charlson and recent developed COVID-19 specific tools lacked it, or were not available to assess. A comprehensive clinical stratification on two-level basis (basal death risk due to chronic conditions by PROFUND index, plus current death risk due to COVID-19 by CURB-65), could be an appropriate approach.

Indexed as

COVID-19CURB-65Death-riskMultimorbidityPROFUND

Identifiers

PMID32877792
PMCPMC7446617
OpenAlexW3081345330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.