ArticleImmunity, inflammation and disease2022
Lung ultrasonography findings of coronavirus disease 2019 patients: Comparison between primary and secondary regions of China.
Article in Immunity, inflammation and disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Qualitative and semi-quantitative ultrasound assessment in delta and Omicron Covid-19 patients: data from high volume reference center.Infectious agents and cancer · 2023Article
- Lung ultrasonography findings of coronavirus disease 2019 patients: Comparison between primary and secondary regions of China.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn unexplained pneumonia occurred in Wuhan, China in December 2019, later identified and named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aimed to compare the ultrasonographic features of the lung between patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan (the primary region) and those in Beijing (the secondary region) and to find the value of applying ultrasound in COVID-19.
methodsA total of 248 COVID-19 cases were collected, including long-term residents in Wuhan (138), those who had a short-term stay in Wuhan (72), and those who had never visited Wuhan (38). Ultrasound examination was performed daily; the highest lung ultrasound score (LUS) was the first comparison point, while the LUS of the fifth day thereafter was the second comparison point. The differences between overall treatment and ultrasonography of left and right lungs among groups were compared.
resultsThe severity decreased significantly after treatment. The scores of the groups with long-term residence and short-term stay in Wuhan were higher than those of the group that had never been to Wuhan.
conclusionUltrasonography is effective for dynamic monitoring of COVID-19. The ultrasonographic features of patients in the Wuhan area indicated relatively severe disease. Thus, Wuhan was the main affected area of china.
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.