The Association Between Biomarkers and Clinical Outcomes in Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia in A Us Cohort

  1. Shant Ayanian
  2. Juan Reyes
  3. Lei Lynn
  4. Karolyn Teufel

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

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.2217/bmm-2020-0309
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.27.20115105: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at George Washington University
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variableMale sex had a higher odds ratio of intubation and ICU transfer than female sex.

    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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study has some limitations. First, due to the retrospective study design, not all laboratory tests were done on all patients and, as a result, the role of an individual marker might be overestimated. Selection bias could overestimate the utility of these biomarkers. Our cohort did not include COVID-19 patients who were evaluated in the emergency room and deemed to be clinically well enough to return home. If biomarkers in these discharged patients were also elevated, their predictive value would be diminished. However, checking inflammatory biomarkers is not the standard of care in the emergency department. Perhaps the clinical context (referred for hospitalization) enhances the benefit of these biomarkers for an inpatient team. Despite these limitations, we believe these markers can aid clinicians in identifying hospitalized COVID-19 patients at risk of clinical deterioration. Our findings suggest that regularly checking IL-6, D-dimer, CRP, LDH, and ferritin has clinical utility in this respect, especially when these markers are above the cut-off values mentioned. Following these biomarkers could ensure closer monitoring of these patients and provide guidance and standardization in the allocation of increasingly scarce resources.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.27.20115105 on medRxiv