Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35111439›Full record

ArticleCureus2021

Comparison of the Performance of Various Scores in Predicting Mortality Among Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19.

Daniyal Jilanee, Shamshad Khan, Syed Muhammad Huzaifa Shah, Natalia M Avendaño Capriles, Camilo Andrés Avendaño Capriles, Hareem Tahir, Afreenish Gul, Syed U Ashraf, Sohaib Tousif, Ahsun Jiwani

RetractedAbstract readRetracted Publication
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Daniyal JilaneeMedical College, Liaquat National Hospital and Medical College, Karachi, PAK.
Shamshad KhanRespiratory Medicine, Blackpool Victoria Hospital, Blackpool, GBR.
Syed Muhammad Huzaifa ShahMedical Education, Ziauddin University, Karachi, PAK.
Natalia M Avendaño CaprilesMedicine, Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla, COL.
Camilo Andrés Avendaño CaprilesFoundations of Clinical Research (FCR) Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
Hareem TahirMedical College, Army Medical College, Rawalpindi, PAK.
Afreenish GulInternal Medicine, Ziauddin University, Karachi, PAK.
Syed U AshrafInternal Medicine, Dow International Medical College, Karachi, PAK.
Sohaib TousifMedicine, Ziauddin University, Karachi, PAK.
Ahsun JiwaniIndus Hospital Research Center, Indus Hospital and Health Network, Karachi, PAK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a major social and economic challenge, devastating the health care system in several countries around the world. Mortality scores are important as they can help health care professionals to plan treatment as per the patients' condition for proper resource allocation. When it comes to patients, it provides invaluable information for implementing advance directives. The aim of the study is to validate mortality scores for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19. Methodology This was a retrospective cohort study that included data from three tertiary care hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan. Data of patients diagnosed with confirmed COVID-19 infection and hospitalized in Ziauddin Hospital, Aga Khan Hospital, and Liaquat National Hospital were enrolled in the study from November 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021. Data was extracted from the hospital management information system (HMIS) using a structured questionnaire. Results Overall, 835 patients were included in the final analysis. The mean age of patients was 53.29 (SD ± 15.17) years, and 675 patients (80.72%) were males. The sensitivity of the CALL score is highest among all four scores, i.e., 77.25%, and the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score has the lowest sensitivity (59.79%). However, CALL has the lowest specificity (58.04%), while qSOFA has the highest specificity (73.91%). However, MulBSTA and CRB-65 have a sensitivity of 70.11% and 64.96%, respectively. Conclusion The current study showed that the CALL score had better sensitivity as compared to other mortality scores.

Indexed as

covid-19hospitalizedmortalitypredictingscores

Identifiers

PMID35111439
PMCPMC8792125

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.