SynthesisPloS one2022
A look back at the first wave of COVID-19 in China: A systematic review and meta-analysis of mortality and health care resource use among severe or critical patients.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The short-term and long-term prognosis of discharged COVID-19 patients in Guangdong during the first wave of pandemic.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Real-Time On-Site Monitoring of Viruses in Wastewater Using NanotrapBiosensors · 2024Article
- Predictors of Intensive Care Unit Admissions in Patients Presenting with Coronavirus Disease 2019.Avicenna journal of medicine · 2024Article
- Risk Factors for One-Year Mortality in Hospitalized Adults with Severe COVID-19.Aging and disease · 2023Article
- Use of threshold PEP with an adult non-rebreather oxygen mask plus prone positioning in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to SARS-CoV-2 infection during the collapse of the health system in a low-income country.SAGE open medical case reports · 2023Article
- Temporal progression of sepsis on critical care COVID-19 patients: a retrospective cohort study.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 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
13 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo investigate the mortality and health care resource use among patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) in the first wave of pandemic in China.
methodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the mortality, discharge rate, length of hospital stay, and use of invasive ventilation in severe or critical COVID-19 cases in China. We searched electronic databases for studies from China with no restrictions on language or interventions patients received. We screened records, extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies in duplicate. We performed the meta-analysis using random-effect models through a Bayesian framework. Subgroup analyses were conducted to examine studies by disease severity, study location and patient enrolment start date. We also performed sensitivity analysis using various priors, and assessed between-study heterogeneity and publication bias for the primary outcomes.
resultsOut of 6,205 titles and abstracts screened, 500 were reviewed in full text. A total of 42 studies were included in the review, of which 95% were observational studies (n = 40). The pooled 28-day and 14-day mortalities among severe or critical patients were 20.48% (7,136 patients, 95% credible interval (CrI), 13.11 to 30.70) and 10.83% (95% CrI, 6.78 to 16.75), respectively. The mortality declined over time and was higher in patients with critical disease than severe cases (1,235 patients, 45.73%, 95% CrI, 22.79 to 73.52 vs. 3,969 patients, 14.90%, 95% CrI, 4.70 to 39.57) and patients in Hubei compared to those outside Hubei (6,719 patients, 26.62%, 95% CrI, 13.11 to 30.70 vs. 244 patients, 5.88%, 95% CrI 2.03 to 14.11). The length of hospital stay was estimated at 18.48 days (6,847 patients, 95% CrI, 17.59 to 21.21), the 28-day discharge rate was 50.48% (3,645 patients, 95% CrI, 26.47 to 79.53), and the use of invasive ventilation rate was 13.46% (4,108 patients, 95% CrI, 7.61 to 22.31).
conclusionsOur systematic review and meta-analysis found high mortality among severe and critical COVID-19 cases. Severe or critical COVID-19 cases consumed a large amount of hospital resources during the outbreak.
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.