Observational studyPloS one2024
A risk stratification model for high-flow nasal cannula use in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 in Japan: A single-center retrospective observational cohort study.
Observational study in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put a strain on the healthcare system, and sudden changes in disease status during home treatment have become a serious issue. Therefore, prediction of disease severity and allocation of sufficient medical resources, including high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), to patients in need are important. We aimed to determine risk factors for the need of HFNC use in COVID-19.
methodsThis was a single-center retrospective observational cohort study including all eligible hospitalized adult patients aged ≥18 years diagnosed with COVID-19 between April 14, 2020 and August 5, 2021 who were treated in the study hospital. The primary outcome is the need for HFNC. Nineteen potential predictive variables, including patient characteristics at hospital admission, were screened using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator and logistic regression to construct a predictive risk score. Accuracy of the risk score was determined using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
resultsThe study cohort included 148 patients. The rate of the need for HFNC was 22.9%. Among the 19 potential variables, percutaneous oxygen saturation (SpO2) <92% (odds ratio [OR] 7.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.806-20.82) and IL-6 (OR 1.021, 95% CI 1.010-1.033) were included in developing the risk score, which was termed interleukin (IL)-6-based COVID-19 severity (IBC-S) score.
conclusionsThe IBC-S score, an easy-to-use risk score based on parameters available at the time of hospital admission, predicted the need for HFNC in patients with COVID-19. The IBC-S score based on interleukin-6 and SpO2 might aid in determining patients who should be transported to a tertiary medical institution or an isolation facility.
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.