PMC:7386785 / 98410-103079 JSON TXT

Annnotations TAB JSON ListView MergeView

LitCovid-PD-FMA-UBERON

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-FMA-UBERON","denotations":[{"id":"T1","span":{"begin":1590,"end":1594},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T2","span":{"begin":1711,"end":1717},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T3","span":{"begin":2154,"end":2159},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T4","span":{"begin":2534,"end":2538},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T5","span":{"begin":2655,"end":2661},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T108","span":{"begin":736,"end":741},"obj":"Body_part"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A1","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T1","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma256135"},{"id":"A2","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T2","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma228738"},{"id":"A3","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T3","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma67498"},{"id":"A4","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T4","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma256135"},{"id":"A5","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T5","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma228738"},{"id":"A108","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T108","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma9576"}],"text":"Study characteristics\nPatient Sampling Purpose: to estimate the prevalence of COVID‐19 in pneumonias during this period and to find the unique features of COVID‐19 as compared to pneumonias caused by other agentsDesign: cross‐sectional, single‐centre, retrospective studyRecruitment: 342 cases of pneumonia were diagnosed in Fever Clinic in Peking University Third Hospital. From these patients, 88 were reviewed by panel discussion as possible or probable cases of COVID‐19, and received 2019‐nCoV detection by RT‐PCRSample size: n = 88 (21 cases)Inclusion criteria: patients visiting the Fever Clinic at Peking University Third Hospital. Based on epidemiological history, epidemiological evidence, fever and/or respiratory symptoms, chest radiological findings and WBC results, cases with possible or probable COVID‐19 were sent for panel discussion and then for 2019‐nCoV detection by RT‐PCRExclusion criteria: COVID‐19 unlikely by panel discussion; lack of CT scan or no signs of pneumonia on CT scan; paediatric patients\nPatient characteristics and setting Facility cases: 2019‐nCoV real‐time PCR testing, which was positive in 19 cases (confirmed cases). In another 2 patients, though PCR testing was negative, a clinical diagnosis was made according to\u2028epidemiological evidence, consistent clinical and CT findings (clinical cases)Facility controls: for the cases with negative viral detection, the diagnosis of COVID‐19 was excluded based on inconsistent epidemiological, clinical or radiological dataCountry: ChinaDates: 21 January 2020‐15 February 2020SymptomsFever with a mean body temperature of 37.8 C\nCough\nExpectoration\nFatigue\nHeadache\nDizziness\nShortness of breath\nMyalgia or arthralgia\nSore throat\nNasal symptoms and diarrhoea\nSeverity of COVID‐19Mild‐moderate: fever and/or respiratory symptoms with pneumonia in radiology examination, without signs of severe or very severe diseases\nSevere: presence of 1 of the following: respiratory rate ≥ 30 beat/min; SpO2 ≤ 93% at rest; PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 300 mmHg\nVery severe: presence of 1 of the following: severe respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation; shock; complicated with other organ failure and requiring ICU admission\nDemographics: COVID‐group only: median age was 42.0 years (25th‐75th percentile, 34.5‐66.0 years). Range 24‐85. Male/female: 11 (52.4%)/10 (47.6%)Exposure history: 19/21 (90.5%) had a clear epidemiological history of COVID‐19. 7 patients, from 5 family clusters, had close contact with their family members\nIndex tests Fever with a mean body temperature of 37.8 C\nCough\nExpectoration\nFatigue\nHeadache\nDizziness\nShortness of breath\nMyalgia or arthralgia\nSore throat\nNasal symptoms and diarrhoea\nTarget condition and reference standard(s) TC: COVID‐19 pneumonia\nRS: 2019‐nCoV real‐time PCR testing or clinical diagnosis was made according to epidemiological evidence, consistent clinical and CT findings\nFlow and timing Time interval not specified\nComparative \nNotes \nMethodological quality\nItem Authors' judgement Risk of bias Applicability concerns\nDOMAIN 1: Patient Selection\nWas a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? Unclear \nWas a case‐control design avoided? Yes \nDid the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? No \nDid the study avoid inappropriate inclusions? No \nCould the selection of patients have introduced bias? High risk \nAre there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question? High\nDOMAIN 2: Index Test (All tests)\nWere the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? Yes \nIf a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? No \nCould the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias? High risk \nAre there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question? Low concern\nDOMAIN 3: Reference Standard\nIs the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? Yes \nWere the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? No \nCould the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias? Low risk \nAre there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question? Low concern\nDOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing\nWas there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? Unclear \nDid all patients receive the same reference standard? Yes \nWere all patients included in the analysis? Yes \nCould the patient flow have introduced bias? High risk "}

LitCovid-PD-UBERON

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-UBERON","denotations":[{"id":"T75","span":{"begin":736,"end":741},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T76","span":{"begin":1711,"end":1717},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T77","span":{"begin":2154,"end":2159},"obj":"Body_part"},{"id":"T78","span":{"begin":2655,"end":2661},"obj":"Body_part"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A75","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T75","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0001443"},{"id":"A76","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T76","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000341"},{"id":"A77","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T77","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000062"},{"id":"A78","pred":"uberon_id","subj":"T78","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0000341"}],"text":"Study characteristics\nPatient Sampling Purpose: to estimate the prevalence of COVID‐19 in pneumonias during this period and to find the unique features of COVID‐19 as compared to pneumonias caused by other agentsDesign: cross‐sectional, single‐centre, retrospective studyRecruitment: 342 cases of pneumonia were diagnosed in Fever Clinic in Peking University Third Hospital. From these patients, 88 were reviewed by panel discussion as possible or probable cases of COVID‐19, and received 2019‐nCoV detection by RT‐PCRSample size: n = 88 (21 cases)Inclusion criteria: patients visiting the Fever Clinic at Peking University Third Hospital. Based on epidemiological history, epidemiological evidence, fever and/or respiratory symptoms, chest radiological findings and WBC results, cases with possible or probable COVID‐19 were sent for panel discussion and then for 2019‐nCoV detection by RT‐PCRExclusion criteria: COVID‐19 unlikely by panel discussion; lack of CT scan or no signs of pneumonia on CT scan; paediatric patients\nPatient characteristics and setting Facility cases: 2019‐nCoV real‐time PCR testing, which was positive in 19 cases (confirmed cases). In another 2 patients, though PCR testing was negative, a clinical diagnosis was made according to\u2028epidemiological evidence, consistent clinical and CT findings (clinical cases)Facility controls: for the cases with negative viral detection, the diagnosis of COVID‐19 was excluded based on inconsistent epidemiological, clinical or radiological dataCountry: ChinaDates: 21 January 2020‐15 February 2020SymptomsFever with a mean body temperature of 37.8 C\nCough\nExpectoration\nFatigue\nHeadache\nDizziness\nShortness of breath\nMyalgia or arthralgia\nSore throat\nNasal symptoms and diarrhoea\nSeverity of COVID‐19Mild‐moderate: fever and/or respiratory symptoms with pneumonia in radiology examination, without signs of severe or very severe diseases\nSevere: presence of 1 of the following: respiratory rate ≥ 30 beat/min; SpO2 ≤ 93% at rest; PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 300 mmHg\nVery severe: presence of 1 of the following: severe respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation; shock; complicated with other organ failure and requiring ICU admission\nDemographics: COVID‐group only: median age was 42.0 years (25th‐75th percentile, 34.5‐66.0 years). Range 24‐85. Male/female: 11 (52.4%)/10 (47.6%)Exposure history: 19/21 (90.5%) had a clear epidemiological history of COVID‐19. 7 patients, from 5 family clusters, had close contact with their family members\nIndex tests Fever with a mean body temperature of 37.8 C\nCough\nExpectoration\nFatigue\nHeadache\nDizziness\nShortness of breath\nMyalgia or arthralgia\nSore throat\nNasal symptoms and diarrhoea\nTarget condition and reference standard(s) TC: COVID‐19 pneumonia\nRS: 2019‐nCoV real‐time PCR testing or clinical diagnosis was made according to epidemiological evidence, consistent clinical and CT findings\nFlow and timing Time interval not specified\nComparative \nNotes \nMethodological quality\nItem Authors' judgement Risk of bias Applicability concerns\nDOMAIN 1: Patient Selection\nWas a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? Unclear \nWas a case‐control design avoided? Yes \nDid the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? No \nDid the study avoid inappropriate inclusions? No \nCould the selection of patients have introduced bias? High risk \nAre there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question? High\nDOMAIN 2: Index Test (All tests)\nWere the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? Yes \nIf a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? No \nCould the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias? High risk \nAre there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question? Low concern\nDOMAIN 3: Reference Standard\nIs the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? Yes \nWere the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? No \nCould the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias? Low risk \nAre there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question? Low concern\nDOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing\nWas there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? Unclear \nDid all patients receive the same reference standard? Yes \nWere all patients included in the analysis? Yes \nCould the patient flow have introduced bias? High risk "}

LitCovid-PD-MONDO

LitCovid-PD-CLO

LitCovid-PD-CHEBI

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CHEBI","denotations":[{"id":"T29918","span":{"begin":2216,"end":2221},"obj":"Chemical"},{"id":"T69555","span":{"begin":2758,"end":2760},"obj":"Chemical"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A36263","pred":"chebi_id","subj":"T29918","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_24433"},{"id":"A35373","pred":"chebi_id","subj":"T69555","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_73819"}],"text":"Study characteristics\nPatient Sampling Purpose: to estimate the prevalence of COVID‐19 in pneumonias during this period and to find the unique features of COVID‐19 as compared to pneumonias caused by other agentsDesign: cross‐sectional, single‐centre, retrospective studyRecruitment: 342 cases of pneumonia were diagnosed in Fever Clinic in Peking University Third Hospital. From these patients, 88 were reviewed by panel discussion as possible or probable cases of COVID‐19, and received 2019‐nCoV detection by RT‐PCRSample size: n = 88 (21 cases)Inclusion criteria: patients visiting the Fever Clinic at Peking University Third Hospital. Based on epidemiological history, epidemiological evidence, fever and/or respiratory symptoms, chest radiological findings and WBC results, cases with possible or probable COVID‐19 were sent for panel discussion and then for 2019‐nCoV detection by RT‐PCRExclusion criteria: COVID‐19 unlikely by panel discussion; lack of CT scan or no signs of pneumonia on CT scan; paediatric patients\nPatient characteristics and setting Facility cases: 2019‐nCoV real‐time PCR testing, which was positive in 19 cases (confirmed cases). In another 2 patients, though PCR testing was negative, a clinical diagnosis was made according to\u2028epidemiological evidence, consistent clinical and CT findings (clinical cases)Facility controls: for the cases with negative viral detection, the diagnosis of COVID‐19 was excluded based on inconsistent epidemiological, clinical or radiological dataCountry: ChinaDates: 21 January 2020‐15 February 2020SymptomsFever with a mean body temperature of 37.8 C\nCough\nExpectoration\nFatigue\nHeadache\nDizziness\nShortness of breath\nMyalgia or arthralgia\nSore throat\nNasal symptoms and diarrhoea\nSeverity of COVID‐19Mild‐moderate: fever and/or respiratory symptoms with pneumonia in radiology examination, without signs of severe or very severe diseases\nSevere: presence of 1 of the following: respiratory rate ≥ 30 beat/min; SpO2 ≤ 93% at rest; PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 300 mmHg\nVery severe: presence of 1 of the following: severe respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation; shock; complicated with other organ failure and requiring ICU admission\nDemographics: COVID‐group only: median age was 42.0 years (25th‐75th percentile, 34.5‐66.0 years). Range 24‐85. Male/female: 11 (52.4%)/10 (47.6%)Exposure history: 19/21 (90.5%) had a clear epidemiological history of COVID‐19. 7 patients, from 5 family clusters, had close contact with their family members\nIndex tests Fever with a mean body temperature of 37.8 C\nCough\nExpectoration\nFatigue\nHeadache\nDizziness\nShortness of breath\nMyalgia or arthralgia\nSore throat\nNasal symptoms and diarrhoea\nTarget condition and reference standard(s) TC: COVID‐19 pneumonia\nRS: 2019‐nCoV real‐time PCR testing or clinical diagnosis was made according to epidemiological evidence, consistent clinical and CT findings\nFlow and timing Time interval not specified\nComparative \nNotes \nMethodological quality\nItem Authors' judgement Risk of bias Applicability concerns\nDOMAIN 1: Patient Selection\nWas a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? Unclear \nWas a case‐control design avoided? Yes \nDid the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? No \nDid the study avoid inappropriate inclusions? No \nCould the selection of patients have introduced bias? High risk \nAre there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question? High\nDOMAIN 2: Index Test (All tests)\nWere the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? Yes \nIf a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? No \nCould the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias? High risk \nAre there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question? Low concern\nDOMAIN 3: Reference Standard\nIs the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? Yes \nWere the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? No \nCould the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias? Low risk \nAre there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question? Low concern\nDOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing\nWas there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? Unclear \nDid all patients receive the same reference standard? Yes \nWere all patients included in the analysis? Yes \nCould the patient flow have introduced bias? High risk "}

LitCovid-PD-HP

LitCovid-sentences

LitCovid-PubTator

PMC:7386785 / 98410-103079 JSONTXT

Annnotations TAB JSON ListView MergeView

PMC:7386785 / 98410-103079 JSON TXT