scholarly journals Demographic risk factors for COVID-19 infection, severity, ICU admission and death: a meta-analysis of 59 studies

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e044640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bart G Pijls ◽  
Shahab Jolani ◽  
Anique Atherley ◽  
Raissa T Derckx ◽  
Janna I R Dijkstra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Icu Admission ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Demographic Risk ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Age And Sex

ObjectiveWe aimed to describe the associations of age and sex with the risk of COVID-19 in different severity stages ranging from infection to death.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed and Embase through 4 May 2020.Study selectionWe considered cohort and case–control studies that evaluated differences in age and sex on the risk of COVID-19 infection, disease severity, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death.Data extraction and synthesisWe screened and included studies using standardised electronic data extraction forms and we pooled data from published studies and data acquired by contacting authors using random effects meta-analysis. We assessed the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.ResultsWe screened 11.550 titles and included 59 studies comprising 36.470 patients in the analyses. The methodological quality of the included papers was high (8.2 out of 9). Men had a higher risk for infection with COVID-19 than women (relative risk (RR) 1.08, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.12). When infected, they also had a higher risk for severe COVID-19 disease (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.27), a higher need for intensive care (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.74) and a higher risk of death (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.91). The analyses also showed that patients aged 70 years and above have a higher infection risk (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.50 to 1.81), a higher risk for severe COVID-19 disease (RR 2.05, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.32), a higher need for intensive care (RR 2.70, 95% CI 1.59 to 4.60) and a higher risk of death once infected (RR 3.61, 95% CI 2.70 to 4.84) compared with patients younger than 70 years.ConclusionsMeta-analyses on 59 studies comprising 36.470 patients showed that men and patients aged 70 and above have a higher risk for COVID-19 infection, severe disease, ICU admission and death.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020180085.

scholarly journals Temporal trends of sex differences for COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation, severe disease, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death: a meta-analysis of 229 studies covering over 10M patients

F1000Research ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
Bart G. Pijls ◽  
Shahab Jolani ◽  
Anique Atherley ◽  
Janna I.R. Dijkstra ◽  
Gregor H.L. Franssen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Disease Severity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
Icu Admission ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Relative Risks ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background: This review aims to investigate the association of sex with the risk of multiple COVID-19 health outcomes, ranging from infection to death. Methods: Pubmed and Embase were searched through September 2020. We considered studies reporting sex and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. Qualitative and quantitative data were extracted using standardised electronic data extraction forms with the assessment of Newcastle Ottawa Scale for risk of bias. Pooled trends in infection, hospitalization, severity, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death rate were calculated separately for men and women and subsequently random-effects meta-analyses on relative risks (RR) for sex was performed. Results: Of 10,160 titles, 229 studies comprising 10,417,452 patients were included in the analyses. Methodological quality of the included studies was high (6.9 out of 9). Men had a higher risk for infection with COVID-19 than women (RR = 1.14, 95%CI: 1.07 to 1.21). When infected, they also had a higher risk for hospitalization (RR = 1.33, 95%CI: 1.27 to 1.41), higher risk for severe COVID-19 (RR = 1.22, 95%CI: 1.17 to 1.27), higher need for Intensive Care (RR = 1.41, 95%CI: 1.28 to 1.55), and higher risk of death (RR = 1.35, 95%CI: 1.28 to 1.43). Within the period studied, the RR for infection and severity increased for men compared to women, while the RR for mortality decreased for men compared to women. Conclusions: Meta-analyses on 229 studies comprising over 10 million patients showed that men have a higher risk for COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, disease severity, ICU admission and death. The relative risks of infection, disease severity and death for men versus women showed temporal trends with lower relative risks for infection and severity of disease and higher relative risk for death at the beginning of the pandemic compared to the end of our inclusion period. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020180085 (20/04/2020)

Timely Revisit of Proprioceptive Deficits in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110668
Author(s):  
Kenney K. L. Lau ◽  
Karlen K. P. Law ◽  
Kenny Y. H. Kwan ◽  
Jason P. Y. Cheung ◽  
Kenneth M. C. Cheung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis ◽  
Idiopathic Scoliosis ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Detection Threshold ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Meta Analyses

Study Design Systematic review and meta-analysis Objectives The present review aimed to summarize the evidence regarding differences in proprioception between children with and without adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Methods Seven electronic databases were searched from their inception to April 10, 2021. Articles were included if they involved: (1) AIS patients aged between 10 and 18 years, (2) measurements of proprioceptive abilities, and (3) comparisons with non-AIS controls. Animal studies, case reports, commentaries, conference proceedings, research protocols, and reviews were excluded. Two reviewers independently conducted literature screening, data extraction, risks of bias assessments, and quality of evidence evaluations. Relevant information was pooled for meta-analyses. Results From 432 identified citations, 11 case-control studies comprising 1121 participants were included. The meta-analyses showed that AIS participants displayed proprioceptive deficits as compared to non-AIS controls. Moderate evidence supported that AIS participants showed significantly larger repositioning errors than healthy controls (pooled mean difference = 1.27 degrees, P < .01). Low evidence substantiated that AIS participants had significantly greater motion detection threshold (pooled mean difference = 1.60 degrees, P < .01) and abnormal somatosensory evoked potentials (pooled mean difference = .36 milliseconds, P = .01) than non-AIS counterparts. Conclusions Consistent findings revealed that proprioceptive deficits occurred in AIS patients. Further investigations on the causal relationship between AIS and proprioception, and the identification of the subgroup of AIS patients with proprioceptive deficit are needed.

Incident myocardial infarction associated with major types of arthritis in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (8) ◽  
pp. 1396-1404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Orit Schieir ◽  
Cedomir Tosevski ◽  
Richard H Glazier ◽  
Sheilah Hogg-Johnson ◽  
Elizabeth M Badley
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Traditional Risk Factors ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Review Criteria ◽  
Age And Sex

ObjectiveTo synthesise, quantify and compare risks for incident myocardial infarction (MI) across five major types of arthritis in population-based studies.MethodsA systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases with additional manual/hand searches for population-based cohort or case-control studies published in English of French between January 1980 and January 2015 with a measure of effect and variance for associations between incident MI and five major types of arthritis: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), gout or osteoarthritis (OA), adjusted for at least age and sex. All search screening, data abstraction quality appraisals were performed independently by two reviewers. Where appropriate, random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool results from studies with a minimum of 10 events.ResultsWe identified a total of 4, 285 articles; 27 met review criteria and 25 criteria for meta-analyses. In studies adjusting for age and sex, MI risk was significantly increased in RA (pooled relative risk (RR): 1.69, 95% CI 1.50 to 1.90), gout (pooled RR: 1.47, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.73), PsA (pooled RR: 1.41, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.69), OA (pooled RR: 1.31, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.71) and tended towards increased risk in AS (pooled RR: 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.65). Traditional risk factors were more prevalent in all types of arthritis. MI risk was attenuated for each type of arthritis in studies adjusting for traditional risk factors and remained significantly increased in RA, PsA and gout.ConclusionsMI risk was consistently increased in multiple types of arthritis in population-based studies, and was partially explained by a higher prevalence of traditional risk factors in all types of arthritis. Findings support more integrated cardiovascular (CV) prevention strategies for arthritis populations that target both reducing inflammation and enhancing management of traditional CV risk factors.

scholarly journals Prenatal maternal stress and risk of neurodevelopmental disorders in the offspring: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicla Manzari ◽  
Karen Matvienko-Sikar ◽  
Franco Baldoni ◽  
Gerard W. O'Keeffe ◽  
Ali S. Khashan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Maternal Stress ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Prenatal Maternal Stress ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Impact

Background: Prenatal maternal stress (PNMS) is defined as the experience of significant levels of prenatal stress, depression or anxiety during pregnancy. PNMS has been associated with increased risk of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in exposed offspring. However, these findings are inconsistent and other studies found no association, meaning a clear consensus on the impact of PNMS on ASD and ADHD risk is required. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize and critically review the existing literature on the effects of PNMS on ASD and ADHD risk. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus and EMBASE) will be searched for articles following a detailed search strategy. We will include cohort and case-control studies that assessed maternal exposure to psychological and/or environmental stress and had ASD or ADHD as an outcome. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles, abstracts and full articles to identify eligible studies. We will use a standardised data extraction form for extracting data and a bias classification tool for assessing study quality. This systematic review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The generic inverse variance method will be used if possible to perform meta-analyses. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required for this study because it will not involve the conduct or inclusion of any experimental or personal data that would require informed consent.  The systematic review will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018084222.

scholarly journals A Meta-Analysis of the Prevalence of Cardiac Valvulopathy in Patients With Hyperprolactinemia Treated With Cabergoline

2018 ◽  
Vol 104 (2) ◽  
pp. 523-538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig E Stiles ◽  
Eugene T Tetteh-Wayoe ◽  
Jonathan P Bestwick ◽  
Richard P Steeds ◽  
William M Drake
Keyword(s):  
Tricuspid Regurgitation ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Single Case ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pituitary Tumors ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Context Cabergoline is first-line treatment for most patients with lactotrope pituitary tumors and hyperprolactinemia. Its use at high dosages in Parkinson disease (PD) has largely been abandoned because of its association with the development of a characteristic restrictive cardiac valvulopathy. Whether similar valvular changes occur in patients receiving lower dosages for treatment of hyperprolactinemia is unclear, although stringent regulatory recommendations for echocardiographic screening exist. Objective To conduct a meta-analysis exploring any link between the use of cabergoline for the treatment of hyperprolactinemia and clinically significant cardiac valvulopathy. Data Sources Full-text articles published through January 2017 were found via PubMed and selected according to strict inclusion criteria. Study Selection All case-control studies were included where patients had received ≥6 months of cabergoline treatment for hyperprolactinemia. Single case reports, previous meta-analyses, review articles, and articles pertaining solely to PD were excluded. Of 76 originally selected studies, 13 met inclusion criteria. Data Extraction Desired data were compiled and extracted from articles by independent observers. Each also independently graded article quality (bias) and met to reach consensus. Data Synthesis More tricuspid regurgitation was observed (OR 3.74; 95% CI, 1.79 to 7.8; P &lt; 0.001) in the cabergoline-treated patients compared with controls. In no patient was tricuspid valve dysfunction diagnosed as a result of clinical symptoms. There was no significant increase in any other valvulopathy. Conclusions Treatment with low-dose cabergoline in hyperprolactinemia appears to be associated with an increased prevalence of tricuspid regurgitation. The clinical significance of this finding is unclear and warrants further investigation.

scholarly journals Ivermectin for prevention and treatment of COVID-19 infection: a systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to inform clinical guidelines

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Bryant ◽  
Theresa A Lawrie ◽  
Therese Dowswell ◽  
Edmund J. Fordham ◽  
Mitchell Scott ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sequential Analysis ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Trial Sequential Analysis ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background Re-purposed medicines may have a role against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The antiparasitic ivermectin, with anti-viral and anti-inflammatory properties, has now been tested in numerous clinical trials.Areas of uncertainty We assessed the efficacy of ivermectin treatment in reducing mortality, in secondary outcomes, and in chemo-prophylaxis, among people with, or at high risk of, covid-19 infection. Data sourcesWe searched bibliographic databases up to April 25 2021. Two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach and additionally in trial sequential analyses for mortality.Twenty-four RCTs involving 3406 participants met review inclusion. Therapeutic Advances Meta-analysis of 15 trials found ivermectin reduced risk of death compared with no ivermectin (average Risk Ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.73; n=2438; I2=49%; moderate-certainty evidence). This result was confirmed in a trial sequential analysis (TSA) using the same DerSimonian-Laird method that underpinned the unadjusted analysis. This was also robust against a TSA using the Biggerstaff-Tweedie method. Low-certainty evidence found ivermectin prophylaxis reduced covid-19 infection by an average 86% (95% CI 79% to 91%). Secondary outcomes provided less certain evidence. Low certainty evidence suggested that that there may be no benefit with ivermectin for ‘need for mechanical ventilation’, whereas effect estimates for ‘improvement’ and ‘deterioration’ clearly favoured ivermectin use. Severe adverse events were rare among treatment trials and evidence of no difference was assessed as low certainty. Evidence on other secondary outcomes was very low certainty.Conclusions Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in covid-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Employing ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.

scholarly journals Differential expression of microRNAs in Alzheimer's disease brain, blood and cerebrospinal fluid: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petros Takousis ◽  
Angélique Sadlon ◽  
Jessica Schulz ◽  
Inken Wohlers ◽  
Valerija Dobricic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Cerebrospinal Fluid ◽  
Differential Expression ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Significant Differential Expression ◽  
Meta Analyses

INTRODUCTION: Several microRNAs (miRNAs) have been implicated in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis but the evidence from individual case control studies remains inconclusive. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed, followed by standardised multi-stage data extraction, quality control, and meta-analyses on eligible data for brain, blood, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) specimens. Results were compared with miRNAs reported in the abstracts of eligible studies or recent qualitative reviews to assess novelty. RESULTS: Data from 147 independent datasets across 107 publications were quantitatively assessed in 461 meta-analyses. Twenty-five, five, and 32 miRNAs showed study-wide significant differential expression (α<1.08x10-4) in brain, CSF, and blood-derived specimens, respectively, with 5 miRNAs showing differential expression in both brain and blood. Of these 57 miRNAs, 13 had not been reported in the abstracts of previous original or review articles. DISCUSSION: Our systematic assessment of differential miRNA expression is the first of its kind in AD and highlights miRNAs of relevance.

scholarly journals Ivermectin for prevention and treatment of COVID-19 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Bryant ◽  
Theresa A Lawrie ◽  
Therese Dowswell ◽  
Edmund Fordham ◽  
Mitchell Scott ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Cost ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Reduced Risk

BackgroundRe-purposed medicines may have role in combating the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The antiparasitic medicine ivermectin, which has anti-viral and anti-inflammatory properties, has been tested in numerous clinical trials with promising results.MethodsWe assessed the efficacy of ivermectin treatment and/or prophylaxis among people with, or at high risk of covid-19 infection. We searched bibliographic databases up to February 2021 and two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.FindingsTwenty-one RCTs involving 2741 participants met review inclusion. Meta-analysis of 13 trials found ivermectin reduced risk of death compared with no ivermectin (average Risk Ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.72; n=1892; I2=57%; low to moderate-certainty evidence. Low certainty evidence found ivermectin prophylaxis reduced covid-19 infection by an average 86% (95% CI 79% to 91%). Secondary outcomes provided very-low or low certainty evidence. Low certainty evidence suggests that that there may be no benefit with ivermectin for ‘need for mechanical ventilation’, whereas effect estimates for ‘improvement’ and ‘deterioration’ favoured ivermectin use. Severe adverse events were rare and evidence of no difference was assessed as low to very low certainty. Evidence on other secondary outcomes was very low certainty.InterpretationLow to moderate-certainty evidence suggests reductions in covid-19 deaths and infections may be possible by using ivermectin. Employing ivermectin early on may reduce the number of people progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin could have an impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.FundingNoneKeywords: ivermectin, prophylaxis, prevention treatment, covid-19, SARS-CoV-2

scholarly journals Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Bryant ◽  
Theresa A Lawrie ◽  
Therese Dowswell ◽  
Edmund Fordham ◽  
Scott Mitchell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Cost ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Average Risk ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Grade Approach

Abstract Background Re-purposed medicines may have role in combating the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The antiparasitic medicine ivermectin, which has anti-viral and anti-inflammatory properties, has been tested in numerous clinical trials with promising results.Methods We assessed the efficacy of ivermectin treatment and/or prophylaxis among people with, or at high risk of covid-19 infection. We searched bibliographic databases up to February 2021 and two review authors sifted for studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted and certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE approach.Findings Twenty-one RCTs involving 2741 participants met review inclusion. Meta-analysis of 13 trials found ivermectin reduced risk of death compared with no ivermectin (average Risk Ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.72; n=1892; I2=57%; low to moderate-certainty evidence. Low-certainty evidence found ivermectin prophylaxis reduced covid-19 infection by an average 86% (95% CI 79% to 91%). Secondary outcomes provided very-low or low certainty evidence. Low certainty evidence suggests that that there may be no benefit with ivermectin for ‘need for mechanical ventilation’, whereas effect estimates for ‘improvement’ and ‘deterioration’ favoured ivermectin use. Severe adverse events were rare and evidence of no difference was assessed as low to very low-certainty. Evidence on other secondary outcomes was very low certainty.Interpretation Low to moderate-certainty evidence suggests reductions in covid-19 deaths and infections may be possible by using ivermectin. Employing ivermectin early on may reduce the number of people progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin could have an impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.

scholarly journals Obesity in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (12) ◽  
pp. 996-1008
Author(s):  
Jamie SY Ho ◽  
Daniel I Fernando ◽  
Mark Y Chan ◽  
Ching-Hui Sia
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Icu Admission ◽  
Hospitalised Patients

Abstract Objective: Obesity has been shown to be associated with adverse outcomes in viral infections such as influenza, but previous studies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had mixed results. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the relationship between COVID-19 and obesity. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, CENTRAL, OpenGrey and preprint servers medRxiv and bioRxiv was performed, with no restriction on language or date of publication. Primary outcomes of this study were intensive care unit (ICU) admission or critical disease, severe disease and mortality. Secondary outcome was a positive COVID-19 test. Meta-analysis was performed using OpenMeta-Analyst software, and heterogeneity was tested using Cochran’s Q test and I2 statistic. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020184953). Results: A total of 1,493 articles were identified and 61 studies on 270,241 patients were included. The pooled prevalence of obesity was 27.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.0–33.2) in hospitalised patients. Obesity was not significantly associated with increased ICU admission or critical illness (odds ratio [OR] 1.25, 95% CI 0.99–1.58, P=0.062, I2=31.0) but was significantly associated with more severe disease (OR 3.13, 95% CI 1.41–6.92, P=0.005, I2=82.6), mortality (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.09–1.69, P=0.006, I2=88.5) and a positive COVID-19 test (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.25–1.81, P<0.001). Conclusion: Obesity increased the risk of severe disease, mortality and infection with COVID-19. Higher body mass index was associated with ICU admission and critical disease. Patients who are obese may be more susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, and infected patients should be monitored closely for adverse outcomes. Keywords: Body mass index, coronavirus, intensive care, mortality, prognosis

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document