ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022
Predictive Risk Factors at Admission and a "Burning Point" During Hospitalization Serve as Sequential Alerts for Critical Illness in Patients With COVID-19.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We intended to establish a novel critical illness prediction system combining baseline risk factors with dynamic laboratory tests for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: We evaluated patients with COVID-19 admitted to Wuhan West Union Hospital between 12 January and 25 February 2020. The data of patients were collected, and the illness severity was assessed. Results: Among 1,150 enrolled patients, 296 (25.7%) patients developed into critical illness. A baseline nomogram model consists of seven variables including age [odds ratio (OR), 1.028; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.004-1.052], sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score (OR, 4.367; 95% CI, 3.230-5.903), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR; OR, 1.094; 95% CI, 1.024-1.168), D-dimer (OR, 1.476; 95% CI, 1.107-1.968), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH; OR, 1.004; 95% CI, 1.001-1.006), international normalised ratio (INR; OR, 1.027; 95% CI, 0.999-1.055), and pneumonia area interpreted from computed tomography (CT) images (medium vs. small [OR, 4.358; 95% CI, 2.188-8.678], and large vs. small [OR, 9.567; 95% CI, 3.982-22.986]) were established to predict the risk for critical illness at admission. The differentiating power of this nomogram scoring system was perfect with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.960 (95% CI, 0.941-0.972) in the training set and an AUC of 0.958 (95% CI, 0.936-0.980) in the testing set. In addition, a linear mixed model (LMM) based on dynamic change of seven variables consisting of SOFA score (value, 2; increase per day [I/d], +0.49), NLR (value, 10.61; I/d, +2.07), C-reactive protein (CRP; value, 46.9 mg/L; I/d, +4.95), glucose (value, 7.83 mmol/L; I/d, +0.2), D-dimer (value, 6.08 μg/L; I/d, +0.28), LDH (value, 461 U/L; I/d, +13.95), and blood urea nitrogen (BUN value, 6.51 mmol/L; I/d, +0.55) were established to assist in predicting occurrence time of critical illness onset during hospitalization. Conclusion: The two-checkpoint system could assist in accurately and dynamically predicting critical illness and timely adjusting the treatment regimen for patients with COVID-19.
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.