ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2024
Fluid Status Assessment in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of hydrosodic balance by impedancemetry in intensive care: a monocentric prospective study, the EBaHIR study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Associations of Biomarkers and Body Water with Dengue Status and Length of Hospital Stay: A Single-Center Observational Study.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Observational
- A comprehensive review of venous excess ultrasound (VExUS) score: evidence from original research.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Review
- Non-linear association between extracellular water/total body water ratio and all-cause mortality: a population-based cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Association between phase angle and daily creatinine excretion changes in critically ill patients: an approach to muscle mass.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fluid status (FS) is a diagnostic challenge in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Here, we compared parameters related to FS derived from cumulative fluid balance (CFB), bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and venous congestion assessed by ultrasound (VExUS) to predict mortality. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of individuals with severe pneumonia due to COVID-19 between July and November 2021 in a single center. Comorbidities, demographic, clinical and laboratory data as well as results from CFB, BIA and VExUS measurements were collected on admission and weekly afterwards for two consecutive evaluations. Seventy-nine patients were included, of which eighteen (14.2%) died. Abnormalities of FS were only identified by BIA. Extracellular water/total body water ratio (ECW/TBW) > 0.394 (overhydrated) by BIA was a good predictor of mortality (AUC = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.067-0.89). Mortality risk was higher in overhydrated patients (OR: 6.2, 95% CI: 1.2-32.6,
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.