ArticleRevista espanola de salud publica2023
[Evolución de marcadores de laboratorio en pacientes con detección persistente de SARS-CoV-2.]
Article in Revista espanola de salud publica, 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.
- Evaluation of suPAR as a Key Prognostic Biomarker in Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Pneumonia.Biomedicines · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe study of the evolution of certain biomarkers in patients with persistent detection of SARS-CoV-2 could determine the profile of the pathology that these patients may suffer. The objective of this study was to describe the evolution of different laboratory markers in patients with persistent detection of SARS-CoV-2, and determining these parameters were into reference values.
methodsPatients were divided into two groups: the control group (G0) included patients with a positive direct test for SARS-CoV-2 followed by 2 negative, while the problem group (G1) included patients with at least 3 consecutive positive tests. The time between consecutive samples was five to twenty days, and only patients with negative serology were included. Demographic data, comorbidities, symptoms, radiology and hospitalization were collected, as well as data from analytic and blood gases. The comparison between the study groups was realized using the t-student and U Mann-Whitney test for quantitative variables, and the χ2 test for qualitative variables. Results with p<0.05 were taken as significant.
resultsNinety patients were included, thirty-eight in G0 and fifty-two in G1. D-dimer decreased 10.20 times more in G0 patients, and normal levels of this parameter at t1 were 1.46 times more frequent in these patients. The percentage of lymphocytes increased sixteen times more in G0, and the normal values in t1 were 10.40 times more common in these patients. C-reactive protein decreased significantly in both groups, and lactate increased more in G1 patients.
conclusionsThe results of the study suggest that some biomarkers evolve differently in patients with persistent detection of SARS-CoV-2, which may have significant clinical impact. This information could help to determine the main organs or systems affected, allowing to anticipate socio-sanitary measures to prevent or compensate these alterations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37226982PMC10540886What 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.