ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2024
A comparative study between first three waves of COVID-19 pandemic with respect to risk factors, initial clinic-demographic profile, severity and outcome.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disruption and recovery: a qualitative study on health services for vulnerable populations during the pandemic.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- An outlook on clinical and demographic variables in patients with severe COVID-19 across different waves in Mexico and SARS-CoV-2 variants: data from two high-specialty centers.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes and practices related to SARS-CoV-2 prevention in Kenya.Journal of public health in Africa · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: During the 2 years and 9 months from March 2020 to December 2022, the SARS-CoV-2 virus raged across the country. Cases occurred in three particular time clusters recognised by World Health Organisation as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) waves. In this study, we compare the clinical parameters of adult non-obstetric COVID-19 patients admitted to our rural tertiary care hospital during the three distinct waves of the pandemic. Materials and Methods: Retrospective chart analysis of 272, 853 and 97 patients admitted with SARS-CoV-2 infection to the only rural medical tertiary care centre in the Sunderbans of West Bengal in the first, second and third waves, respectively, was done after obtaining ethical and scientific clearance. Clinical [vital parameters, oxygen requirement, mental status, risk factor assessment, duration of hospital stay, modified-emergency warning score (m-EWS), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), confusion, uraemia, respiratory rate, blood pressure, age ≥ 65 years (CURB65)], epidemiological variables (age, gender, and vaccination status), laboratory parameters and in-hospital outcome were recorded and analysed statistically. Results: Statistically significant ( Conclusion: The second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic was the most severe in comparison with the other two waves, while the outcome was poorer in those with co-morbidities, especially in the first wave.
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.