ArticleFrontiers in medicine2021
Establishment of Routine Clinical Indicators-Based Nomograms for Predicting the Mortality in Patients With COVID-19.
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.
- Prognostic models in COVID-19 infection that predict severity: a systematic review.European journal of epidemiology · 2023Pooled it
- Development and validation of a model for early prediction of severe/critical COVID-19 in elderly patients.PeerJ · 2026Article
- Predicting In-Hospital Mortality in Severe COVID-19: A Systematic Review and External Validation of Clinical Prediction Rules.Biomedicines · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to establish and validate the nomograms to predict the mortality risk of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using routine clinical indicators. This retrospective study included a development cohort enrolled 2,119 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and a validation cohort included 1,504 patients with COVID-19. The demographics, clinical manifestations, vital signs, and laboratory tests of the patients at admission and outcome of in-hospital death were recorded. The independent factors associated with death were identified by a forward stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis and used to construct the two prognostic nomograms. The nomogram 1 was a full model to include nine factors identified in the multivariate logistic regression and nomogram 2 was built by selecting four factors from nine to perform as a reduced model. The nomogram 1 and nomogram 2 showed better performance in discrimination and calibration than the Multilobular infiltration, hypo-Lymphocytosis, Bacterial coinfection, Smoking history, hyper-Tension and Age (MuLBSTA) score in training. In validation, nomogram 1 performed better than nomogram 2 for calibration. We recommend the application of nomogram 1 in general hospitals which provide robust prognostic performance though more cumbersome; nomogram 2 in the out-patient, emergency department, and mobile cabin hospitals, which depend on less laboratory examinations to make the assessment more convenient. Both the nomograms can help the clinicians to identify the patients at risk of death with routine clinical indicators at admission, which may reduce the overall mortality of COVID-19.
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.