Case- fatality rate in COVID- 19 patients: A meta- analysis of publicly accessible database

  1. Souvik Maitra
  2. Mansij Biswas
  3. Sulagna Bhattacharjee

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

A novel coronavirus was reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019 to cause severe acute respiratory symptoms (COVID-19). In this meta-analysis, we estimated case fatality rate from COVID-19 infection by random effect meta-analysis model with country level data. Publicly accessible web database WorldOMeter ( https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ ) was accessed on 24th March 2020 GMT and reported total number of cases, total death, active cases and seriously ill/ critically ill patients were retrieved. Primary outcome of this meta-analysis was case fatality rate defined by total number of deaths divided by total number of diagnosed cases. Pooled case fatality rate (95% CI) was 1.78 (1.34-2.22) %. Between country heterogeneity was 0.018 (p<0.0001). Pooled estimate of composite poor outcome (95% CI) was 4.06 (3.24-4.88) % at that point of time after exclusion of countries reported small number of cases. Pooled mortality rate (95% CI) was 33.97 (27.44-40.49) % amongst closed cases (where patients have recovered or died) with. Meta regression analysis identified statistically significant association between health expenditure and case fatality rate (p=0.0017).

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.09.20059683: (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

    No key resources detected.

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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 10.1101/2020.04.09.20059683v2 on medRxiv
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.04.09.20059683v1 on medRxiv