ArticleInfection2024
Clinical and epidemiological factors causing longer SARS-CoV 2 viral shedding: the results from the CoviCamp cohort.
Article in Infection, 2024. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Clinical Impact of the Omicron Variant on Octogenarian Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: The Results from CoviCamp Cohort.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Rapid Determination of SARS-CoV-2 Integrity and Infectivity by Using Propidium Monoazide Coupled with Digital Droplet PCR.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- The Potential Role of Viral Persistence in the Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC).Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to investigate how long hospitalized patients stayed positive to the nasopharyngeal swab, and what demographic and clinical factors influence the time-to-negative swab.
methodsWe enrolled in a multicenter, observational, retrospective study involving 17 COVID-19 units in eight cities of the Campania, southern Italy all patients hospitalized from March 2020 to May 2021 diagnosed with Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection for whom time-to-negative swab was available.
results963 patients were enrolled. We defined three groups considering time-to-negative swab: the first including patients with time-to-negative swab before the 26th day, the second including patients with time-to-negative swab from day 26 to day 39, and the third including patients with time-to-negative swab > 39 days. 721 (74.9%) patients belonged to the first group, 194 (20.1%) to the second, and 52 (5.4%) belonged to the third group. Belonging to group 2 and 3 seemed to be influenced by age (p value < 0.001), Charlson comorbidity index (p = 0.009), arterial hypertension (p = 0.02), cardiovascular disease (p = 0.017), or chronic kidney disease (CKD) (p = 0.001). The multivariable analysis confers a leading role to CKD, with an odds ratio of 2.3 as factor influencing belonging to the groups showing a longer time-to-negative swab. Patients with CKD and diabetes were more frequently in the third group. DISCUSSION: Our analysis showed that CKD is a factor related to longer time-to-negative swab, probably because of immunosuppression related to this condition.
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.