Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35862414›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

The importance of effect sizes when comparing cycle threshold values of SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Celine Brinkmann, Peter Gohl, Dietrich Mack, Johannes Pfeifer, Mònica Palmada Fenés, Oliver Harzer, Bernhard Zöllner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Celine BrinkmannBioscientia Laboratory MVZ Nordrhein, Moers, Germany.
Peter GohlBioscientia Laboratory MVZ Ingelheim, Ingelheim, Germany.
Dietrich MackBioscientia Laboratory MVZ Ingelheim, Ingelheim, Germany.
Johannes PfeiferRhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences, Kamp-Lintfort, Germany.
Mònica Palmada FenésRhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences, Kleve, Germany.
Oliver HarzerBioscientia Laboratory MVZ Ingelheim, Ingelheim, Germany.
Bernhard ZöllnerBioscientia Laboratory MVZ Nordrhein, Moers, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6330-558X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe aimed to elaborate whether cycle threshold (Ct) values differ significantly between wild type SARS-CoV-2 (wtV) and certain viral variants and how strong or weak a potential significant effect might be.

methodsIn a retrospective study, we investigated 1873 SARS-CoV-2 positive samples for the occurrence of viral marker mutations. Age, gender, clinical setting, days after onset of symptoms, and Ct values were recorded. Statistical analysis was carried out with special consideration of effect sizes.

resultsDuring the study period wtV was detected in 1013 samples (54%), while 845 (45%) patients carried the Alpha variant of concern (VOC), and 15 (1%) the Beta VOC. For further analysis, only wtV and the Alpha VOC were included. In a multi-factor ANOVA and post-hoc test with Bonferroni-correction for the age groups we found significant main-effects for Ct values of the viral variant (wtV mean 26.4 (SD 4.27); Alpha VOC mean 25.0 (SD 3.84); F (1,1850) = 55.841; p < .001) and the clinical setting (outpatients: mean 25.7 (SD 4.1); inpatients: mean 27.0 (SD 4.2); F (1,1850) = 8.520, p = .004). However, since the effect sizes were very small (eta squared for the Alpha VOC = .029 and the clinical setting = .004), there was only a slight trend towards higher viral loads of the Alpha VOC compared to wtV.

conclusionsIn order to compare different variants of SARS-CoV-2 the calculation of effect sizes seems to be necessary. A combination of p-values as estimates of the existance of an effect and effect sizes as estimates of the magnitude of a potential effect may allow a better insight into transmission mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2HumansRetrospective StudiesSerologic Tests

Identifiers

PMID35862414
PMCPMC9302753

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.