ArticleClinical nursing research2023
Homozygous-Recessive Characteristics as a Biomarker of Predisposition for COVID-19.
Article in Clinical nursing research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring Clinical and Imaging Differences in COVID-19: an Observational Approach to the IFITM3 rs12252 Polymorphism.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), a new form of severe acute respiratory syndrome, has caused a global pandemic. The aim of this study was to analyze homozygous-recessive characteristics (HRC) in the group of COVID-19 patients, considering their gender, forms of the disease (mild and severe symptoms), risk factors: hypertension, diabetes mellitus type 2, hyperlipidemia, smoking habits, and the distribution of ABO blood group. Using the HRC test, we analyzed 20 HRCs in a sample of 321 individuals: 205 patients and 116 controls. The average HRC in patients was significantly higher than controls, as well as in patients with severe symptoms compared to patients with mild symptoms. The patients with higher HRC (cut-off ≤5.5) experienced a significantly increased risk of disease of 2.3 times (
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.