ArticleFrontiers in medicine2021
Probable Causes and Risk Factors for Positive SARS-CoV-2 Testing in Recovered Patients: Evidence From Guangzhou, China.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Hospital readmissions and post-discharge all-cause mortality in COVID-19 recovered patients; A systematic review and meta-analysis.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Clinical and Gene Features of SARS-CoV-2-Positive Recurrence in Patients Recovered From COVID-19.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022Article
- A comparative study of virus nucleic acid re-positive and non-re-positive patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant strain in the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Some patients retested positive for SARS-CoV-2 following negative testing results and discharge. However, the potential risk factors associated with redetectable positive testing results in a large sample of patients who recovered from COVID-19 have not been well-estimated. A total of 745 discharged patients were enrolled between January 30, 2020, and September 9, 2020, in Guangzhou, China. Data on the clinical characteristics, comorbidities, drug therapy, RT-PCR testing, and contact modes to close contacts were collected. Patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 after discharge were confirmed by guidelines issued by China. The repositive rate in different settings was calculated. Among 745 discharged patients, 157 (21.1%; 95% CI, 18.2-24.0%) tested repositive and the repositive rate was 16.8% (95% CI, 14.1-24.0%) for nasopharyngeal swabs and 9.7% (95% CI, 7.0-12.5%) for anal swabs. Among them, 55 (35.0%) were asymptomatic, 15 (9.6%) had mild symptoms, 83 (52.9%) had moderate symptoms, and 4 (2.6%) had severe symptoms at the first admission. The days from discharge to repositivity was 8.0 (IQR, 8.0-14.0). Most repositive patients were without clinical symptoms, and lymphocyte cell counts were higher than before being discharged. The likelihood of repositive testing for SARS-CoV-2 RNA was significantly higher among patients who were of younger age (OR, 3.88; 95% CI, 1.74-8.66, 0-17 years old), had asymptomatic severity (OR, 4.36; 95% CI, 1.47-12.95), and did not have clinical symptoms (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.32-2.70, without fever). No other positive patients emerged within the families or close contacts of repositive patients. Our findings support prolonged but intermittent viral shedding as the probable cause for this phenomenon; we need to familiarize with the possibility that the virus will remain endemic.
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.