Clinical Characteristics of 2019 Novel Infected Coronavirus Pneumonia: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis

  1. Kai Qian
  2. Yi Deng
  3. Yong-Hang Tai
  4. Jun Peng
  5. Hao Peng
  6. Li-Hong Jiang

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

A novel pneumonia associated with the 2019 coronavirus infected pneumonia (NCIP) suddenly broke out in Wuhan, China in December 2019. 37287 confirmed cases and 813 death case in China (Until 8th/Feb/2019) have been reported in just fortnight. Although this risky pneumonia with high infection rates and high mortality rates need to be resolved immediately, major gaps in our knowledge of clinical characters of it were still not be established. The aim of this study is to summaries and analysis the clinical characteristics of 2019-nCoV pneumonia.

Methods

Literatures have been systematically performed a search on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, GreyNet International, and The Cochrane Library from inception up to February 8, 2020. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess quality, and publication bias was analyzed by Egger’s test. In the single-arm meta-analysis, A fix-effects model was used to obtain a pooled incidence rate. We conducted subgroup analysis according to geographic region and research scale.

Results

A total of nine studies including 356 patients were included in this study, the mean age was 52.4 years and 221 (62.1%) were male. The pooled incidences rate of symptoms as follows: pharyngalgia (12.2%, 95% CI: 0.087-0.167), diarrhea (9.2%, 95% CI: 0.062-0.133) and headache (8.9%, 95% CI: 0.063-0.125). Meanwhile, 5.7% (95% CI: 0.027-0.114) of patients were found without any symptoms although they were diagnosed by RT-PCR. In the terms of CT imaging examination, the most of patients showed bilateral mottling or ground-glass opacity, 8.6% (95% CI: 0.048-0.148) of patients with crazy-paving pattern, and 11.5% (95% CI: 0.064-0.197) of patients without obvious CT imaging presentations. The pooled incidence of mortality was 8.9% (95% CI: 0.062-0.126).

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first evidence-based medicine research to further elaborate the clinical characteristics of NCIP, which is beneficial to the next step of prevention and treatment.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.02.14.20021535: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    The protocol for the review was registered with PROSPERO (Provisional registration number: 168532) Search Strategy: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, GreyNet International (http://www.greynet.org/), and The Cochrane Library were searched for articles published until February 6 2020.
    PubMed
    suggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)
    Embase
    suggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)
    Cochrane Library
    suggested: (Cochrane Library, RRID:SCR_013000)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    A number of limitations need to be acknowledged. The limitations include those the number of included studies is small, thus limiting to the detection of the publication bias and leading to uncertainty of practical relevance of our meta-analysis. In addition, the clinical characteristics are related to many factors, such as basic physical condition, disease progress, examination and treatment conditions, etc. However, we were not able to conduct further subgroup analysis based on the abovementioned factor because most of the included studies did not separate the participants into different groups for outcome measurements. Third, significant heterogeneity remains a critical concern in this meta-analysis. To solve this problem, we used random-effects in meta-analysis and subgroup analysis was performed in this study24. Besides, we did not calculate the pooled incidence rate unless the source was identified by subgroup analysis. significant heterogeneity or a public basis10. Last but not least, the single-arm meta-analysis without a control group, causality is difficult to determine from the cases alone. However, all over the world, the onset of reactivation was relatively short and consistent. The strengths of this work include our ability to detect a serious question that was not observed during the clinical development program for NCIP. In conclusion, the results of this single-arm meta-analysis and systemic review give us a quantitative pooled incidence rate of clinical char...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.02.14.20021535v1 on medRxiv