Clinical Characteristics of Patients with Severe Pneumonia Caused by the 2019 Novel Coronavirus in Wuhan, China

  1. Yafei Wang
  2. Ying Zhou
  3. Zhen Yang
  4. Dongping Xia
  5. Shuang Geng

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

A new virus broke out in Wuhan, Hubei, China, and was later named 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). The clinical characteristics of severe pneumonia caused by 2019-nCoV are still not clear.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to explore the clinical characteristics and risk factors of the severe pneumonia caused by the 2019-nCoV in Wuhan, China.

Method

The study included patients hospitalized at the central hospital of Wuhan who had been diagnosed with a pneumonia caused by the novel coronavirus. Clinical features, chronic co-morbidities, demographic data, laboratory examinations, and chest computed tomography (CT) scans were reviewed through electronic medical records. SPSS was used for data analysis to explore the clinical characteristics and risk factors of the patients with the severe pneumonia.

Results

A total of 110 patients diagnosed with 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia were included in the study, including 38 with severe pneumonia and 72 with non-severe pneumonia. Statistical analysis showed that advanced age, an increase of D-dimer, and a decrease of lymphocytes were characteristics of the patients with severe pneumonia. Moreover, in the early stage of the disease, chest CT scans of patients with the severe pneumonia showed the illness can progress rapidly.

Conclusions

Advanced age, lymphocyte decline, and D-dimer elevation are important characteristics of patients with severe pneumonia. Clinicians should focus on these characteristics to identify high-risk patients at an early stage.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.03.02.20029306: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: The study was approved by the ethics committee of Wuhan Central Hospital (Yuan lun han (2020) no.4).
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    We used SPSS software (version 23.0) for statistical analysis.
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    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:
    Limitations: This study had several limitations. First, only 110 patients from a single hospital were included in this study; a larger scale study needs to be carried out to confirm our conclusions. Second, most of the patients were still hospitalized when the manuscript was submitted, so we could not verify the efficacy of the therapeutic and prognosis of the patients.

    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 10.1101/2020.03.02.20029306 on medRxiv
  3. Version published to 10.1159/000507940