Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 605

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Positive rate of RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in 4880 cases from one hospital in Wuhan, China, from Jan to Feb 2020

Open access
Liu, Rui, Han, Huan, Liu, Fang, Lv, Zhihua, Wu, Kailang, Liu, Yingle, Feng, Yong, Zhu, Chengliang·2020·Clinica Chimica Acta

Abstract

Highlights • The SARS-CoV-2 NAT positive rate was about 38% for the total 4880 specimens.• Male and older population had a significant higher positive rates.• 57% was positive among the specimens from the Fever Clinics.• Age, not gender, was the risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 infection in fever clinics.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cca.2020.03.009

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 605

Metadata

Authors
Liu, R., Han, H., Liu, F., Lv, Z., Wu, K., Liu, Y., Feng, Y., & Zhu, C.
Venue
Clinica Chimica Acta
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-06
Volume
505
Pages
172-175
ISSN
0009-8981 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3010603941
Cited by
605
References
5
FWCI
16.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Positive rate of RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in 4880 cases from one hospital in Wuhan, China, from Jan to Feb 2020. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.cca.2020.03.009
The paper
Liu, R., Han, H., Liu, F., Lv, Z., Wu, K., Liu, Y., Feng, Y., & Zhu, C. (2020). Positive rate of RT-PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in 4880 cases from one hospital in Wuhan, China, from Jan to Feb 2020. Clinica Chimica Acta. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2020.03.009

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.