ArticleNew microbes and new infections2022
Illness tracking in SARS-CoV-2 tested persons using a smartphone app: a non-interventional, prospective, cohort study.
Article in New microbes and new infections, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting low oxygen in patients with acute COVID-19 infection isolating at home: a clinical prediction model.BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Trial
- Cardiorespiratory impact of COVID-19 in young adults: A propensity score-weighted cohort study.New microbes and new infections · 2025Article
- Surveillance of global, travel-related illness using a novel app: a multivariable, cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Persistence, prevalence, and polymorphism of sequelae after COVID-19 in unvaccinated, young adults of the Swiss Armed Forces: a longitudinal, cohort study (LoCoMo).The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Infection risks associated with the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar.New microbes and new infectionsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are few data on the range and severity of symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection or the impact on life quality in infected, previously healthy, young adults such as Swiss Armed Forces personnel. It is also unclear if an app can be used to remotely monitor symptoms in persons who test positive. Using a smartphone app called ITITP (Illness Tracking in Tested Persons) and weekly pop-up questionnaires, we aimed to evaluate the spectrum, duration, and impact of symptoms reported after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test according to sex, age, location, and comorbidities, and to compare these to responses from persons who tested negative. We followed up 502 participants (57% active participation), including 68 (13.5%) positive tested persons. Hospitalisation was reported by 6% of the positive tested participants. We found that positives reported significantly more symptoms that are typical of COVID-19 compared to negatives. These symptoms with odds ratio (OR > 1) were
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.