Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 205

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

The clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with diabetes and secondary hyperglycaemia with coronavirus disease 2019: A single‐centre, retrospective, observational study in Wuhan

Open access
Zhang, Yang, Li, Haichao, Zhang, Jian, Cao, Yedi, Zhao, Xue, Yu, Nan, Gao, Ying, Ma, Jing, Zhang, Hong, Zhang, Junqing, Guo, Xiaohui, Liu, Xinmin·2020·Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism

Abstract

Aim: To explore whether coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients with diabetes and secondary hyperglycaemia have different clinical characteristics and prognoses than those without significantly abnormal glucose metabolism. Materials and methods: We retrospectively analysed 166 COVID‐19 patients at Tongji Hospital (Wuhan) from 8 February to 21 March 2020. Clinical characteristics and outcomes (as of 4 April 2020) were compared among control (group 1), secondary hyperglycaemia (group 2: no diabetes history, fasting plasma glucose levels of ≥7.0 mmol/L once and HbA1c values <6.5%) and patients with diabetes (group 3). Results: Compared with group 1, groups 2 and 3 had higher rates of leukocytosis, neutrophilia, lymphocytopenia, eosinopenia and levels of hypersensitive C‐reactive protein, ferritin and d‐dimer ( P < .05 for all). Group 2 patients had higher levels of lactate dehydrogenase, prevalence of liver dysfunction and increased interleukin‐8 (IL‐8) than those in group 1, and a higher prevalence of increased IL‐8 was found in group 2 than in group 3 ( P < .05 for all). The proportions of critical patients in groups 2 and 3 were significantly higher compared with group 1 (38.1%, 32.8% vs. 9.5%, P < .05 for both). Groups 2 and 3 had significantly longer hospital stays than group 1, which was nearly 1 week longer. The composite outcomes risks were 5.47 (1.56‐19.82) and 2.61 (0.86‐7.88) times greater in groups 2 and 3 than in group 1. Conclusions: Hyperglycaemia in both diabetes and secondary hyperglycaemia patients with COVID‐19 may indicate poor prognoses. There were differences between patients with secondary hyperglycaemia and those with diabetes. We recommend that clinicians pay more attention to the blood glucose status of COVID‐19 patients, even those not diagnosed with diabetes before admission.

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/dom.14086

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 205

Metadata

Authors
Zhang, Y., Li, H., Zhang, J., Cao, Y., Zhao, X., Yu, N., Gao, Y., Ma, J., Zhang, H., Zhang, J., Guo, X., & Liu, X.
Venue
Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-06-17
Volume
22
Issue
8
Pages
1443-1454
ISSN
  • 1462-8902 (ISSN-L)
  • 1463-1326
OpenAlex
W3024925768
Cited by
205
References
5
FWCI
5.49
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

How to cite

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

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with diabetes and secondary hyperglycaemia with coronavirus disease 2019: A single‐centre, retrospective, observational study in Wuhan. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/dom.14086
The paper
Zhang, Y., Li, H., Zhang, J., Cao, Y., Zhao, X., Yu, N., Gao, Y., Ma, J., Zhang, H., Zhang, J., Guo, X., & Liu, X. (2020). The clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with diabetes and secondary hyperglycaemia with coronavirus disease 2019: A single‐centre, retrospective, observational study in Wuhan. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism. https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.14086

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.