ArticleInfection & chemotherapy2022
Co-Infection in COVID-19 Pneumonia: Discussion Continues.
Article in Infection & chemotherapy, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- SARS-CoV-2 andFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Observational
- Meningococcal Pneumonia in a Patient With Pulmonary Amyloidosis and a Recent COVID-19 Infection.Cureus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sixty-six patients with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and pneumonia on chest computer tomography were prospectively recruited. A combined respiratory swab for polymerase chain reaction (PCR), urine sample for pneumococcal and Legionella antigen, and sputum or endotracheal aspirate were collected. Urinary antigen and blood culture tests were negative in all cases as well as the PCR tests for other respiratory viruses and atypical bacterial pathogens. In total, 5 patients (7.5%) had co-infection. By PCR a high prevalence of colonization with bacterial pathogens was found. In conclusion, co-infection is rare in coronavirus disease 2019 patients, and additional examination to identify other pathogens should be performed only in selected cases.
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.