ArticleScientific reports2023
Diversity of symptom phenotypes in SARS-CoV-2 community infections observed in multiple large datasets.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Long-term biological surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in critical points for municipal sewage catchment in light of wastewater-based epidemiology, public health and environmental hygiene.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- CT-based phenotyping of COVID-19: cluster analysis of pulmonary and extrapulmonary imaging markers from a multicentre retrospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Receptor Binding for the Entry Mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2: Insights from the Original Strain and Emerging Variants.Viruses · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Variability in case severity and in the range of symptoms experienced has been apparent from the earliest months of the COVID-19 pandemic. From a clinical perspective, symptom variability might indicate various routes/mechanisms by which infection leads to disease, with different routes requiring potentially different treatment approaches. For public health and control of transmission, symptoms in community cases were the prompt upon which action such as PCR testing and isolation was taken. However, interpreting symptoms presents challenges, for instance, in balancing the sensitivity and specificity of individual symptoms with the need to maximise case finding, whilst managing demand for limited resources such as testing. For both clinical and transmission control reasons, we require an approach that allows for the possibility of distinct symptom phenotypes, rather than assuming variability along a single dimension. Here we address this problem by bringing together four large and diverse datasets deriving from routine testing, a population-representative household survey and participatory smartphone surveillance in the United Kingdom. Through the use of cutting-edge unsupervised classification techniques from statistics and machine learning, we characterise symptom phenotypes among symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive community cases. We first analyse each dataset in isolation and across age bands, before using methods that allow us to compare multiple datasets. While we observe separation due to the total number of symptoms experienced by cases, we also see a separation of symptoms into gastrointestinal, respiratory and other types, and different symptom co-occurrence patterns at the extremes of age. In this way, we are able to demonstrate the deep structure of symptoms of COVID-19 without usual biases due to study design. This is expected to have implications for the identification and management of community SARS-CoV-2 cases and could be further applied to symptom-based management of other diseases and syndromes.
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.