Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35031644›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Better COVID-19 Intensive Care Unit survival in females, independent of age, disease severity, comorbidities, and treatment.

Daniek A M Meijs, Bas C T van Bussel, Björn Stessel, Jannet Mehagnoul-Schipper, Anisa Hana, Clarissa I E Scheeren, Sanne A E Peters, Walther N K A van Mook, Iwan C C van der Horst, Gernot Marx and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Respiratory syncytial virus infection in adult and paediatric patients admitted to intensive care in Australia: A nation-wide comparison with COVID-19.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

13 authors.

Daniek A M MeijsDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center + (Maastricht UMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, the Netherlands. daniek.meijs@mumc.nl.
Bas C T van BusselDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center + (Maastricht UMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Björn StesselDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium.
Jannet Mehagnoul-SchipperDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, VieCuri Medisch Centrum, Venlo, the Netherlands.
Anisa HanaDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Laurentius Ziekenhuis, Roermond, the Netherlands.
Clarissa I E ScheerenDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Zuyderland Medisch Centrum, Heerlen/Sittard, the Netherlands.
Sanne A E PetersJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Walther N K A van MookDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center + (Maastricht UMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Iwan C C van der HorstDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center + (Maastricht UMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Gernot MarxDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Rheinisch Westfälische Hochschule (RWTH) Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Dieter MesottenDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium.
Chahinda Ghossein-DohaDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center + (Maastricht UMC+), P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
CoDaP investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although male Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) patients have higher Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission rates and a worse disease course, a comprehensive analysis of female and male ICU survival and underlying factors such as comorbidities, risk factors, and/or anti-infection/inflammatory therapy administration is currently lacking. Therefore, we investigated the association between sex and ICU survival, adjusting for these and other variables. In this multicenter observational cohort study, all patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted to seven ICUs in one region across Belgium, The Netherlands, and Germany, and requiring vital organ support during the first pandemic wave were included. With a random intercept for a center, mixed-effects logistic regression was used to investigate the association between sex and ICU survival. Models were adjusted for age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, comorbidities, and anti-infection/inflammatory therapy. Interaction terms were added to investigate effect modifications by sex with country and sex with obesity. A total of 551 patients (29% were females) were included. Mean age was 65.4 ± 11.2 years. Females were more often obese and smoked less frequently than males (p-value 0.001 and 0.042, respectively). APACHE II scores of females and males were comparable. Overall, ICU mortality was 12% lower in females than males (27% vs 39% respectively, p-value < 0.01) with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.62 (95%CI 0.39-0.96, p-value 0.032) after adjustment for age and APACHE II score, 0.63 (95%CI 0.40-0.99, p-value 0.044) after additional adjustment for comorbidities, and 0.63 (95%CI 0.39-0.99, p-value 0.047) after adjustment for anti-infection/inflammatory therapy. No effect modifications by sex with country and sex with obesity were found (p-values for interaction > 0.23 and 0.84, respectively). ICU survival in female SARS-CoV-2 patients was higher than in male patients, independent of age, disease severity, smoking, obesity, comorbidities, anti-infection/inflammatory therapy, and country. Sex-specific biological mechanisms may play a role, emphasizing the need to address diversity, such as more sex-specific prediction, prognostic, and therapeutic approach strategies.

Indexed as

PandemicsAgedCOVID-19FemaleHospitalizationHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSeverity of Illness Index

Identifiers

PMID35031644
PMCPMC8760268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.