Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34135068›Full record

SynthesisJournal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research2021

Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of non-severe and severe pediatric and adult COVID-19 patients across different geographical regions in the early phase of pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Pearleen Ee Yong Chua, Shimoni Urvish Shah, Hao Gui, Jiayun Koh, Jyoti Somani, Junxiong Pang

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. COVID19 biomarkers: What did we learn from systematic reviews?Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Review
  19. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pearleen Ee Yong Chua *Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.
Shimoni Urvish Shah *Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.
Hao Gui *Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.
Jiayun Koh *Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.
Jyoti SomaniDivision of Infectious Diseases, National University Hospital, Singapore.
Junxiong PangSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore ephpjv@nus.edu.sg.ORCID 0000-0002-9788-701X
National University of Singapore · SGNational University Hospital · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic and meta-review aimed to compare clinical presentation, outcomes, and care management among patients with COVID-19 during the early phase of the pandemic. A total of 77 peer-reviewed publications were identified between January 1, 2020 and April 9, 2020 from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Chinese Medical Journal databases. Subsequently, meta-analysis of 40 non-overlapping studies, comprising of 4844 patients from seven countries, was conducted to see differences in clinical characteristics and laboratory outcomes across patients from different geographical regions (Wuhan, other parts of China and outside China), severity (non-severe, severe and fatal) and age groups (adults and children). Patients from Wuhan had a higher mean age (54.3 years) and rates of dyspnea (39.5%) compared with patients from other parts of China and outside China. Myalgia, fatigue, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and fatalities were also significantly more prevalent among Wuhan patients. A significant dose-response increase in prevalence of diabetes, D-dimer, white blood cells, neutrophil levels and ARDS was seen from non-severe to severe and fatal outcomes. A significant increase in mean duration of symptom onset to admission was seen between non-severe cases (4.2 days) and severe and fatal cases (6.3 days and 8.8 days, respectively). Proportion of asymptomatic cases was higher in children (20%) compared with adults (2.4%). In conclusion, patients with COVID-19 from Wuhan displayed more severe clinical disease during the early phase of the pandemic, while disease severity was significantly lesser among pediatric cases. This review suggests that biomarkers at admission may be useful for prognosis among patients with COVID-19.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultChildGlobal HealthHumansMortalityObservational Studies as TopicOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePractice Patterns, Physicians'PrognosisSARS-CoV-2Severity of Illness IndexSymptom AssessmentCOVID-19

Identifiers

PMID34135068
PMCPMC8485127
OpenAlexW3169094188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.