ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2024
Do patients infected with human coronavirus before the COVID-19 pandemic have less risk of being infected with COVID-19?
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time course and determinants of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in Costa Rica: the RESPIRA study.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Observational
- The relationship between upper airway parameters and COVID-19 symptom severity in adolescents.Frontiers in oral health · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: Although seasonal human coronaviruses (HCoVs) have long been recognized as respiratory tract viruses, the newly identified SARS-CoV-2 caused a pandemic associated with severe respiratory failure. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of COVID-19 infection in patients diagnosed in three tertiary teaching hospitals, both with and without prior confirmed HCoV infection, and to compare these cohorts in terms of COVID-19 contraction. Materials and methods: In our study, we examined HCoV PCR-positive cases obtained retrospectively between January 2014 and March 2020 from three University Hospital Microbiology Laboratories (Cohort 1), as well as PCR-negative patients detected in the same PCR cycle as the positive cases (Cohort 2). We also evaluated subgroups of HCoV-positive cases. Results: There was no difference in COVID-19 contraction rates between Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 (p = 0.724). When previous HCoV subgroups of COVID-19-positive patients were examined, no significant difference was found between the betacoronavirus and alphacoronavirus subgroups (p = 0.822), among the four groups (NL63, 229E, OC43, HKU-1) (p = 0.207), or between the OC43 subgroup and the other groups (p = 0.295). Conclusion: Being previously infected with HCoV did not provide protection against COVID-19 in our study group. We suggest evaluating the possible effect of previous OC43 infection on COVID-19 contraction in larger cohorts.
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.