Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38844390›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

COVID-19 profiles in general practice: a latent class analysis.

Emilie Ferrat, William Mirat, Emmanuelle Boutin, Emilie Maroto, Sophie Brossier, Jean-Denis Hoonakker, Etienne Audureau, Tan-Trung Phan, Sylvie Bastuji-Garin

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Emilie FerratUniv Paris Est Creteil, INSERM, IMRB, CepiA Team, Creteil, France.
William MiratDepartment of General Practice, Univ Paris Est Creteil, Creteil, France william.mirat@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-6143-7837
Emmanuelle BoutinUniv Paris Est Creteil, INSERM, IMRB, CepiA Team, Creteil, France.
Emilie MarotoDepartment of General Practice, Univ Paris Est Creteil, Creteil, France.
Sophie BrossierDepartment of General Practice, Univ Paris Est Creteil, Creteil, France.
Jean-Denis HoonakkerDepartment of General Practice, Univ Paris Est Creteil, Creteil, France.
Etienne AudureauUniv Paris Est Creteil, INSERM, IMRB, CepiA Team, Creteil, France.
Tan-Trung PhanDepartment of General Practice, Univ Paris Est Creteil, Creteil, France.ORCID 0000-0001-9990-7398
Sylvie Bastuji-GarinUniv Paris Est Creteil, INSERM, IMRB, CepiA Team, Creteil, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGeneral practitioners (GPs) were on the front line of the COVID-19 outbreak. Identifying clinical profiles in COVID-19 might improve patient care and enable closer monitoring of at-risk profiles.

objectivesTo identify COVID-19 profiles in a population of adult primary care patients, and to determine whether the profiles were associated with negative outcomes and persistent symptoms. DESIGN, SETTING AND

participantsIn a prospective multicentre study, 44 GPs from multiprofessional primary care practices in the Paris area of France recruited 340 consecutive adult patients (median age: 47 years) with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 during the first two waves of the epidemic. METHOD AND OUTCOME: A latent class (LC) analysis with 11 indicators (clinical signs and symptoms) was performed. The resulting profiles were characterised by a 3-month composite outcome (COVID-19-related hospital admission and/or death) and persistent symptoms three and 6 months after inclusion.

resultsWe identified six profiles: 'paucisymptomatic' (LC1, 9%), 'anosmia and/or ageusia' (LC2, 12.9%), 'influenza-like syndrome with anosmia and ageusia' (LC3, 15.5%), 'influenza-like syndrome without anosmia or ageusia' (LC4, 24.5%), 'influenza-like syndrome with respiratory impairment' (LC5) and a 'complete form' (LC6, 17.7%). At 3 months, 7.4% of the patients were hospitalised (with higher rates in LC5), and 18% had persistent symptoms (with higher rates in LC5 and LC6). At 6 months, 6.4% of the patients had persistent symptoms, with no differences between LCs.

conclusionOur findings might help GPs to identify patients at risk of persistent COVID-19 symptoms and hospital admission and then set up procedures for closer monitoring.

Indexed as

COVID-19General PracticeLatent Class AnalysisSARS-CoV-2AdultAgedAgeusiaAnosmiaFemaleFranceHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedParisPrimary Health Careclinical decision-makingCOVID-19primary health careSARS-CoV-2 infection

Identifiers

PMID38844390
PMCPMC11163649

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.