ArticlePloS one2022
Self-reported symptoms as predictors of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the general population living in the Amsterdam region, the Netherlands.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spatio-temporal forecasting of COVID-19 cases in the Netherlands for source and contact tracing.International journal of population data science · 2025Article
- The Detection of Influenza Virus Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Cameroon.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2024Article
- Experiences and perceptions of COVID-19 infection and vaccination among Palestinian refugees in Jerash camp and Jordanian citizens: a comparative cross-sectional study by face-to-face interviews.Infectious diseases of poverty · 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMost COVID-19 symptoms are non-specific and also common in other respiratory infections. We aimed to assess which symptoms are most predictive of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic people of the general population who were tested.
methodsWe used anonymised data of all SARS-CoV-2 test results from the Public Health Service of Amsterdam from June 1,2020 through August 31, 2021. Symptoms were self-reported at time of requesting a test. Multivariable logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to identify predictors of a positive test. Included symptoms were: cough, fever, loss of smell or taste, muscle ache, runny nose, shortness of breath, and throat ache; adjustments were made for age and gender, and stratification by month.
resultsOverall, 12.0% of 773,680 tests in 432,213 unique individuals were positive. All symptoms were significantly associated with a positive test result, the strongest positive associations were: cough (aOR = 1.78, 95%CI = 1.75-1.80), fever (aOR = 2.11, 95%CI = 2.07-2.14), loss of smell or taste (aOR = 2.55, 95%CI = 2.50-2.61), and muscle ache (aOR = 2.38, 95%CI = 2.34-2.43). The adjusted odds ratios for loss of smell or taste slightly declined over time, while that for cough increased.
conclusionCough, fever, loss of smell or taste, and muscle ache appear to be most strongly associated with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test in symptomatic people of the general population who were tested.
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.