Evidence Hub

Haematological characteristics and risk factors in the classification and prognosis evaluation of COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study

Danying Liao, Fen Zhou, Li-Li Luo, Min Xu, Hongbo Wang, J. Xia, Yong Gao, L. Cai et al.

The Lancet Haematology, 2020

466 participants · 436 citations

Abstract

Summary Background COVID-19 is an ongoing global pandemic. Changes in haematological characteristics in patients with COVID-19 are emerging as important features of the disease. We aimed to explore the haematological characteristics and related risk factors in patients with COVID-19. Methods This retrospective cohort study included patients with COVID-19 admitted to three designated sites of Wuhan Union Hospital (Wuhan, China). Demographic, clinical, laboratory, treatment, and outcome data were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between patients with moderate, severe, and critical disease (defined according to the diagnosis and treatment protocol for novel coronavirus pneumonia, trial version 7, published by the National Health Commission of China). We assessed the risk factors associated with critical illness and poor prognosis. Dynamic haematological and coagulation parameters were investigated with a linear mixed model, and coagulopathy screening with sepsis-induced coagulopathy and International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis overt disseminated intravascular coagulation scoring systems was applied. Findings Of 466 patients admitted to hospital from Jan 23 to Feb 23, 2020, 380 patients with COVID-19 were included in our study. The incidence of thrombocytopenia (platelet count 16 s; OR 4·94 [1·50–16·25], p=0·0094), and increased D-dimer (>2 mg/L; OR 4·41 [1·06–18·30], p=0·041). Thrombotic and haemorrhagic events were common complications in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 466 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free