Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35948378›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open2022

Diagnostic yield of screening for SARS-CoV-2 among patients admitted to hospital for alternate diagnoses: an observational cohort study.

Philip Davis, Rhonda Rosychuk, Jeffrey P Hau, Ivy Cheng, Andrew D McRae, Raoul Daoust, Eddy Lang, Joel Turner, Jaspreet Khangura, Patrick T Fok and 4 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04702945 (Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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.

NCT04702945 unknown statusnot on this map

Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) - Population-based Registry of Suspected and Confirmed COVID-19 Cases

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorUniversity of British ColumbiaRan2020 to 2023Enrolled200,000ConditionsCovid-19
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Observational
  5. Article
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

14 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Philip DavisDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada phil.davis@usask.ca.
Rhonda RosychukDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Jeffrey P HauCentre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Ivy ChengDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andrew D McRaeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2743-4290
Raoul DaoustDépartement Médecine de Famille et Médecine d'Urgence, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6507-0198
Eddy LangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0850-4337
Joel TurnerDepartment of Emergency Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Jaspreet KhanguraDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Northeast Community Health Centre, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Patrick T FokDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Maja StachuraDepartment of Emergency Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Baljeet BrarDepartment of Emergency Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Corinne M HohlDepartment of Emergency Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9210-7838
CCEDRRN investigators, and for the Network of Canadian Emergency Researchers and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group
University of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Calgary · CADalhousie University · CAMcGill University · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CAUniversité de Montréal · CAUniversity of Alberta · CAUniversity of Saskatchewan · CAVancouver Coastal Health · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the diagnostic yield of screening patients for SARS-CoV-2 who were admitted with a diagnosis unrelated to COVID-19 and to identify risk factors for positive tests.

designCohort from the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network registry.

setting30 acute care hospitals across Canada.

participantsPatients hospitalised for non-COVID-19-related diagnoses who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between 1 March and 29 December 2020. MAIN OUTCOME: Positive nucleic acid amplification test for SARS-CoV-2. OUTCOME MEASURE: Diagnostic yield.

resultsWe enrolled 15 690 consecutive eligible adults who were admitted to hospital without clinically suspected COVID-19. Among these patients, 122 tested positive for COVID-19, resulting in a diagnostic yield of 0.8% (95% CI 0.64% to 0.92%). Factors associated with a positive test included presence of fever, being a healthcare worker, having a positive household contact or institutional exposure, and living in an area with higher 7-day average incident COVID-19 cases.

conclusionsUniversal screening of hospitalised patients for COVID-19 across two pandemic waves had a low diagnostic yield and should be informed by individual-level risk assessment in addition to regional COVID-19 prevalence. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04702945.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2AdultCanadaCOVID-19 TestingHospitalsHumansPandemicsCOVID-19Diagnostic microbiologyEPIDEMIOLOGYOrganisation of health services

Identifiers

PMID35948378
PMCPMC9378945
OpenAlexW4290943230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.