ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2023
Critical COVID-19 patients through first, second, and third wave: retrospective observational study comparing outcomes in intensive care unit.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognosis of critically ill immunocompromised patients with COVID-19 admitted for acute respiratory failure: a retrospective propensity score analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- The Effect of Naturally Acquired Immunity on Mortality Predictors: A Focus on Individuals with New Coronavirus.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Article
- Burden of acute and long-term COVID-19: a nationwide study in Bahrain.Frontiers in public health · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The time-course of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was characterized by subsequent waves identified by peaks of intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates. During these periods, progressive knowledge of the disease led to the development of specific therapeutic strategies. This retrospective study investigates whether this led to improvement in outcomes of COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU. Methods: Outcomes were evaluated in consecutive adult COVID-19 patients admitted to our ICU, divided into three waves based on the admission period: the first wave from February 25 Results: Overall, 428 patients were included in the analysis: 102, 169, and 157 patients in the first, second, and third wave. The ICU and in-hospital crude mortalities were lower by 7% and 10% in the third wave compared to the other two waves (P>0.05). A higher number of ICU- and hospital-free days at day 90 was found in the third wave when compared to the other two waves (P=0.001). Overall, 62.6% underwent invasive ventilation, with decreasing requirement during the waves (P=0.002). The adjusted Cox model showed no difference in the hazard ratio (HR) for mortality among the waves. In the propensity-matched analysis the hospital mortality rate was reduced by 11% in the third wave (P=0.044). Conclusions: With application of best practice as known by the time of the first three waves of the pandemic, our study failed to identify a significant improvement in mortality rate when comparing the different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, notwithstanding, the sub-analyses showed a trend in mortality reduction in the third wave. Rather, our study identified a possible positive effect of dexamethasone on mortality rate reduction and the increased risk of death related to bacterial infections in the three waves.
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.