Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4,004

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical characteristics of 140 patients infected with SARS‐CoV‐2 in Wuhan, China

Open access
Zhang, Jin-jin, Dong, Xiang, Cao, Yi-yuan, Yuan, Ya-dong, Yang, Yi-bin, Yan, You-qin, Akdis, Cezmi A., Gao, Ya-dong·2020·Allergy
DOI 10.1111/all.14238
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) infection has been widely spread. We aim to investigate the clinical characteristic and allergy status of patients infected with SARS‐CoV‐2. Methods: Electronic medical records including demographics, clinical manifestation, comorbidities, laboratory data, and radiological materials of 140 hospitalized COVID‐19 patients, with confirmed result of SARS‐CoV‐2 viral infection, were extracted and analyzed. Results: An approximately 1:1 ratio of male (50.7%) and female COVID‐19 patients was found, with an overall median age of 57.0 years. All patients were community‐acquired cases. Fever (91.7%), cough (75.0%), fatigue (75.0%), and gastrointestinal symptoms (39.6%) were the most common clinical manifestations, whereas hypertension (30.0%) and diabetes mellitus (12.1%) were the most common comorbidities. Drug hypersensitivity (11.4%) and urticaria (1.4%) were self‐reported by several patients. Asthma or other allergic diseases were not reported by any of the patients. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, 1.4%) patients and current smokers (1.4%) were rare. Bilateral ground‐glass or patchy opacity (89.6%) was the most common sign of radiological finding. Lymphopenia (75.4%) and eosinopenia (52.9%) were observed in most patients. Blood eosinophil counts correlate positively with lymphocyte counts in severe (r = .486, P < .001) and nonsevere (r = .469, P < .001) patients after hospital admission. Significantly higher levels of D‐dimer, C‐reactive protein, and procalcitonin were associated with severe patients compared to nonsevere patients (all P < .001). Conclusion: Detailed clinical investigation of 140 hospitalized COVID‐19 cases suggests eosinopenia together with lymphopenia may be a potential indicator for diagnosis. Allergic diseases, asthma, and COPD are not risk factors for SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Older age, high number of comorbidities, and more prominent laboratory abnormalities were associated with severe patients.

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 · 10.1111/all.14238

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Zhang, J.-J., Dong, X., Cao, Y.-Y., Yuan, Y.-D., Yang, Y.-B., Yan, Y.-Q., Akdis, C. A., & Gao, Y.-D.
Venue
Allergy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-02-27
Volume
75
Issue
7
Pages
1730-1741
ISSN
  • 0105-4538 (ISSN-L)
  • 1398-9995
DOI
10.1111/all.14238
OpenAlex
W3007814559
Cited by
4,004
References
6
FWCI
111.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

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.