Observational studyPloS one2021
Prevalence and clinical course of upper airway respiratory virus infection in critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies.
Observational study in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global Epidemiology and Disease Burden of Human Parainfluenza Virus in Adults: A Systematic Review.Reviews in medical virology · 2026Pooled it
- Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients With Hematologic Malignancies Hospitalized With Respiratory Viral Infections.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Severity of Respiratory Syncytial Virus and Other Respiratory Viruses Versus Seasonal Influenza Among Hospitalized Patients With Cancer.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Changes in respiratory infection trends during the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with haematologic malignancy.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical significance of upper airway respiratory virus (RV) detection in patients with hematologic malignancies remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the association between upper airway RV detection and prognosis in critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies.
methodsThis retrospective observational study included 331 critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies who presented respiratory symptoms and their nasopharyngeal swab was tested using a multiplex PCR assay between January 2017 and December 2018. A logistic regression model was used to adjust for potential confounding factors in the association between assay positivity and in-hospital mortality.
resultsAmong the 331 analyzed patients, RVs were detected in 29.0%. The overall mortality rates in the intensive care unit and hospital were 56.8% and 65.9%, respectively. Positive upper airway RV detection was associated with relapsed hematologic malignancies, higher level of C-reactive protein, and prior use of high dose steroids and anti-cancer chemotherapeutic drugs. Furthermore, it was independently associated with in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 2.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.23 to 4.54). Among different RVs, parainfluenza virus was more prevalent among patients who died in the hospital than among those who survived (11.5% vs. 3.5%, P = 0.027).
conclusionsRV detection in the upper respiratory tract was relatively common in our cohort and was significantly associated with a poor prognosis. Thus, it can be used as a predictor of prognosis. Moreover, RV presence in the upper respiratory tract should be examined in patients who have previously been prescribed with high dose corticosteroids and anti-cancer drugs.
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.