ArticleScientific reports2024
Comparative analysis of COVID-19 pneumonia in pregnant versus matched non-pregnant women: radiologic, laboratory, and clinical perspectives.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Placental Histiocyte Phenotypes in Chronic Histiocytic Intervillositis: A Comprehensive Immunophenotypic and Morphologic Atlas.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the severity and outcomes of COVID-19 in pregnant women, focusing on laboratory and radiological discrepancies between pregnant women and matched nonpregnant women. In this retrospective cross-sectional analysis, we matched 107 nonpregnant women with 66 pregnant women in terms of age, comorbidities, and the interval between symptom onset and hospital admission. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, and radiological data were collected, and chest CT scans were evaluated using a severity scale ranging from 0 to 5. Logistic regression and adjusted Cox regression models were used to assess the impact of various factors on pregnancy status and mortality rates. Differences in several laboratory parameters, including the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, liver aminotransferases, alkaline phosphatase, urea, triglycerides, cholesterol, HbA1c, ferritin, coagulation profiles, and blood gases, were detected. Radiologic exams revealed that nonpregnant women had sharper opacities, whereas pregnant women presented with hazy opacities and signs of crypt-organizing pneumonia. A notable difference was also observed in the pulmonary artery diameter. The mortality rate among pregnant women was 4.62%, which was comparable to the 5.61% reported in nonpregnant patients. Compared with nonpregnant patients, pregnancy did not significantly affect the severity or mortality of COVID-19. Our study revealed discernible differences in specific laboratory and imaging markers between pregnant and nonpregnant COVID-19 patients.
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.