ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2023
Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit during the first and second waves of the pandemic in Brazil: a single-center retrospective cohort study.
Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of the Inflammasome Pathway According to the Expression of Proteins and Genetic Polymorphisms in COVID-19 Patients.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Observational
- Assessment of mortality due to severe SARS-CoV-2 infection in public and private intensive care units in Brazil: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2025Article
- Mortality, hospitalizations, and persistence of symptoms in the outpatient setting of the first COVID-19 wave in Brazil: results of SARS-Brazil cohort study.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe and compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients admitted to intensive care units during the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsIn this retrospective single-center cohort study, data were retrieved from the Epimed Monitor System; all adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit between March 4, 2020, and October 1, 2021, were included in the study. We compared the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients admitted to the intensive care unit of a quaternary private hospital in São Paulo, Brazil, during the first (May 1, 2020, to August 31, 2020) and second (March 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021) waves of the COVID-19 pandemic.
resultsIn total, 1,427 patients with COVID-19 were admitted to the intensive care unit during the first (421 patients) and second (1,006 patients) waves. Compared with the first wave group [median (IQR)], the second wave group was younger [57 (46-70) versus 67 (52-80) years; p<0.001], had a lower SAPS 3 Score [45 (42-52) versus 49 (43-57); p<0.001], lower SOFA Score on intensive care unit admission [3 (1-6) versus 4 (2-6); p=0.018], lower Charlson Comorbidity Index [0 (0-1) versus 1 (0-2); p<0.001], and were less frequently frail (10.4% versus 18.1%; p<0.001). The second wave group used more noninvasive ventilation (81.3% versus 53.4%; p<0.001) and high-flow nasal cannula (63.2% versus 23.0%; p<0.001) during their intensive care unit stay. The intensive care unit (11.3% versus 10.5%; p=0.696) and in-hospital mortality (12.3% versus 12.1%; p=0.998) rates did not differ between both waves.
conclusionIn the first and second waves, patients with severe COVID-19 exhibited similar mortality rates and need for invasive organ support, despite the second wave group being younger and less severely ill at the time of intensive care unit admission.
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.