COVID-19 Case Series at UnityPoint Health St. Luke’s Hospital in Cedar Rapids, IA
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
A retrospective, descriptive study of all patients tested for SARS-CoV2 on admission for illness to a community hospital in Iowa from 3/21/20 thru 6/14/20 consisted of evaluation as to demographics, presentation and hospital course. Ninety-one patients were SARS-CoV2 PCR+ with 63% being male and a median age of 60. Cardiovascular disease was a significant comorbidity in the PCR+ group. Fever, cough, dyspnea, nausea, emesis, diarrhea, headache and myalgias were significantly more common in that group, as was an elevated CRP, LDH, serum ferritin and transaminases. Overall survival of the COVID-19 patients was 88%, 77% in the critically ill, 59% of those mechanically ventilated and 33% of those requiring new dialysis. Survival was 93% in those not receiving any antivirals. Survival of those treated with hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin was 92%, compared to 86% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine alone. The latter two groups were significantly more ill than the untreated group. A transition from an early intubation strategy to aggressive utilization of high flow nasal cannula and noninvasive ventilation(i.e BiPAP) was successful in freeing up ICU resources.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.17.20156521: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not 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 …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.17.20156521: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not 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.
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.17.20156521: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable Among the 91 patients, 63% were male with a mean age of 61 and median age of 60 years. Table 2: Resources
Data from additional tools added to each annotation on a weekly basis.
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 is not a substitute for expert review. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers) in the …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.17.20156521: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable Among the 91 patients, 63% were male with a mean age of 61 and median age of 60 years. Table 2: Resources
Data from additional tools added to each annotation on a weekly basis.
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 is not a substitute for expert review. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers) in the manuscript, and detects sentences that appear to be missing RRIDs. SciScore also checks to make sure that rigor criteria are addressed by authors. It does this by detecting sentences that discuss criteria such as blinding or power analysis. SciScore does not guarantee that the rigor criteria that it detects are appropriate for the particular study. Instead it assists authors, editors, and reviewers by drawing attention to sections of the manuscript that contain or should contain various rigor criteria and key resources. For details on the results shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.
-
