ArticleScientific reports2021
Cross sectional study of the clinical characteristics of French primary care patients with COVID-19.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- COVID-19 assessment in family practice-A clinical decision rule based on self-rated symptoms and contact history.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The early identification of patients suffering from SARS-CoV-2 infection in primary care is of outmost importance in the current pandemic. The objective of this study was to describe the clinical characteristics of primary care patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We conducted a cross-sectional study between March 24 and May 7, 2020, involving consecutive patients undergoing RT-PCR testing in two community-based laboratories in Lyon (France) for a suspicion of COVID-19. We examined the association between symptoms and a positive test using univariable and multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for clustering within laboratories, and calculated the diagnostic performance of these symptoms. Of the 1561 patients tested, 1543 patients (99%) agreed to participate. Among them, 253 were positive for SARS-CoV-2 (16%). The three most frequently reported 'ear-nose-throat' and non-'ear-nose-throat' symptoms in patients who tested positive were dry throat (42%), loss of smell (36%) and loss of taste (31%), respectively fever (58%), cough (52%) and headache (45%). In multivariable analyses, loss of taste (OR 3.8 [95% CI 3.3-4.4], p-value < 0.001), loss of smell (OR 3.0 [95% CI 1.9-4.8], p < 0.001), muscle pain (OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.2-2.0], p = 0.001) and dry nose (OR 1.3 [95% CI 1.1-1.6], p = 0.01) were significantly associated with a positive result. In contrast, sore throat (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.4-0.8], p = 0.003), stuffy nose (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.6-0.7], p < 0.001), diarrhea (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.5-0.6], p < 0.001) and dyspnea (OR 0.5 [95% CI 0.3-0.7], p < 0.001) were inversely associated with a positive test. The combination of loss of taste or smell had the highest diagnostic performance (OR 6.7 [95% CI 5.9-7.5], sensitivity 44.7% [95% CI 38.4-51.0], specificity 90.8% [95% CI 89.1-92.3]). No other combination of symptoms had a higher performance. Our data could contribute to the triage and early identification of new clusters of cases.
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.