Trial reportEuropean journal of medical research2023
Retrospective study on the efficacy of monocyte distribution width (MDW) as a screening test for COVID-19.
Trial report in European journal of medical research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel inflammatory biomarkers in the prognosis of COVID-19.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseasePooled it
- Monocyte distribution width as an adjunctive biomarker for differentiating pulmonary tuberculosis from cavitary nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- The Role of Monocyte Distribution Width (MDW) in the Prediction of Death in Adult Patients with Sepsis.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Monocyte distribution width (MDW) and DECAF: two simple tools to determine the prognosis of severe COPD exacerbation.Internal and emergency medicine · 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
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPathogenic genetic testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can detect viruses with high sensitivity; however, there are several challenges. In the prevention, testing, and treatment of COVID-19, more effective, safer, and convenient methods are desired. We evaluated the possibility of monocyte distribution width (MDW) as an infection biomarker in COVID-19 testing.
methodsThe efficacy of MDW as a screening test for COVID-19 was retrospectively assessed in 80 patients in the COVID-19 group and 232 patients in the non-COVID-19 group (141 patients with acute respiratory infection, 19 patients with nonrespiratory infection, one patient with a viral infection, 11 patients who had received treatment for COVID-19, one patient in contact with COVID-19 patients, and 59 patients with noninfectious disease).
resultsThe median MDW in 80 patients in the COVID-19 group was 23.3 (17.2-33.6), and the median MDW in 232 patients in the non-COVID-19 group was 19.0 (13.6-30.2) (P < 0.001). When the COVID-19 group was identified using the MDW cut-off value of 21.3 from the non-COVID-19 group, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.844, and the sensitivity and specificity were 81.3% and 78.2%, respectively. Comparison of MDW by severity between the COVID-19 group and patients with acute respiratory infection in the non-COVID-19 group showed that MDW was significantly higher in the COVID-19 group for all mild, moderate I, and moderate II disease.
conclusionsMDW (cut-off value: 21.3) may be used as a screening test for COVID-19 in fever outpatients. Trial registration This study was conducted after being approved by the ethics committee of National Hospital Organization Omuta National Hospital (Approval No. 3-19). This study can be accessed via https://omuta.hosp.go.jp/files/000179721.pdf .
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.