ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2024
Predicting the outcome of death by CALL Score in COVID-19 patients.
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 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.
- Severity Scores in SARS-CoV-2 Infection-A Comprehensive Bibliometric Review and Visualization Analysis.Epidemiologia (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the performance of the CALL Score tool in predicting the death outcome in COVID-19 patients.
methodsA total of 897 patients were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine the association between characteristics of the CALL Score and the occurrence of death. The relationship between CALL Score risk classification and the occurrence of death was also examined. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to identify optimal cutoff points for the CALL Score and the outcome.
resultsThe study revealed that age>60 years, DHL>500, and lymphocyte count ≤1000 emerged as independent predictors of death. Higher risk classifications of the CALL Score were associated with an increased likelihood of death. The optimal CALL Score cutoff point for predicting the death outcome was 9.5 (≥9.5), with a sensitivity of 70.4%, specificity of 80.3%, and accuracy of 80%.
conclusionThe CALL Score showed promising discriminatory ability for death outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Age, DHL level, and lymphocyte count were identified as independent predictors. Further validation and external evaluation are necessary to establish the robustness and generalizability of the CALL Score in diverse clinical settings.
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.