ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020
Patients with Initial Negative RT-PCR and Typical Imaging of COVID-19: Clinical Implications.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Thrombosis of Medium-Sized and Large Arteries During Covid-19 Infection: Results of the COVIVASC Study.Annals of vascular surgery · 2022Article
- Article
- The broad spectrum of COVID-like patients initially negative at RT-PCR testing: a cohort study.BMC public health · 2022Article
- False-negative real-time polymerase chain reaction tests in COVID-19 patients: an epidemiological analysis of 302 patients.Public health · 2021Article
- Temporal variations in the diagnostic performance of chest CT for Covid-19 depending on disease prevalence: Experience from North-Eastern France.European journal of radiology · 2021Article
- The Clinical Significance of Procalcitonin Elevation in Patients over 75 Years Old Admitted for COVID-19 Pneumonia.Mediators of inflammation · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The sensitivity of reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has been questioned due to negative results in some patients who were strongly suspected of having coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of our study was to analyze the prognosis of infected patients with initial negative RT-PCR in the emergency department (ED) during the COVID-19 outbreak. This study included two cohorts of adult inpatients admitted into the ED. All patients who were suspected to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 and who underwent a typical chest CT imaging were included. Thus, we studied two distinct cohorts: patients with positive RT-PCR (PCR+) and those with negative initial RT-PCR (PCR-). The data were analyzed using Bayesian methods. We included 66 patients in the PCR- group and 198 in the PCR+ group. The baseline characteristics did not differ except in terms of a proportion of lower chronic respiratory disease in the PCR- group. We noted a less severe clinical presentation in the PCR- group (lower respiratory rate, lower oxygen need and mechanical ventilation requirement). Hospital mortality (9.1% vs. 9.6%) did not differ between the two groups. Despite an initially less serious clinical presentation, the mortality of patients infected by SARS-CoV-2 with a negative RT-PCR did not differ from those with positive RT-PCR.
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.