ArticleHuman genomics2024
Critical insights on "Association of the C allele of rs479200 in the EGLN1 gene with COVID‑19 severity in Indian population: a novel finding".
Article in Human genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recent article by Harit et al. in Human Genomics reported a novel association of the C allele of rs479200 in the human EGLN1 gene with severe COVID-19 in Indian patients. The gene in context is an oxygen-sensor gene whose T allele has been reported to contribute to the inability to cope with hypoxia due to increased expression of the EGLN1 gene and therefore persons with TT genotype of EGLN1 rs479200 are more susceptible to severe manifestations of hypoxia. In contrast to this dogma, Harit et al. showed that the C allele is associated with the worsening of COVID-19 hypoxia without suggesting or even discussing the scientific plausibility of the association. The article also suffers from certain epidemiological, statistical, and mathematical issues that need to be critically elaborated and discussed. In this context, the findings of Harit et al. may be re-evaluated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.