scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Hubei University of Medicine

EducationShiyan, China
About: Hubei University of Medicine is a education organization based out in Shiyan, China. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Apoptosis & Cell growth. The organization has 5641 authors who have published 3111 publications receiving 44934 citations. The organization is also known as: Wuhan Medical College Yunyang School.
Topics: Apoptosis, Cell growth, Cancer, Population, Cell cycle


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is found that among laboratory confirmed cases of COVID-19, patients with any comorbidity yielded poorer clinical outcomes than those without and a greater number ofComorbidities also correlated with poorer clinical outcome.
Abstract: Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) outbreak is evolving rapidly worldwide. Objective To evaluate the risk of serious adverse outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) by stratifying the comorbidity status. Methods We analysed the data from 1590 laboratory-confirmed hospitalised patients 575 hospitals in 31 province/autonomous regions/provincial municipalities across mainland China between December 11th, 2019 and January 31st, 2020. We analyse the composite endpoints, which consisted of admission to intensive care unit, or invasive ventilation, or death. The risk of reaching to the composite endpoints was compared according to the presence and number of comorbidities. Results The mean age was 48.9 years. 686 patients (42.7%) were females. Severe cases accounted for 16.0% of the study population. 131 (8.2%) patients reached to the composite endpoints. 399 (25.1%) reported having at least one comorbidity. The most prevalent comorbidity was hypertension (16.9%), followed by diabetes (8.2%). 130 (8.2%) patients reported having two or more comorbidities. After adjusting for age and smoking status, COPD [hazards ratio (HR) 2.681, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 1.424–5.048], diabetes (HR 1.59, 95%CI 1.03–2.45), hypertension (HR 1.58, 95%CI 1.07–2.32) and malignancy (HR 3.50, 95%CI 1.60–7.64) were risk factors of reaching to the composite endpoints. The HR was 1.79 (95%CI 1.16–2.77) among patients with at least one comorbidity and 2.59 (95%CI 1.61–4.17) among patients with two or more comorbidities. Conclusion Among laboratory-confirmed cases of Covid-19, patients with any comorbidity yielded poorer clinical outcomes than those without. A greater number of comorbidities also correlated with poorer clinical outcomes.

2,587 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The prevalence of chronic kidney disease in China was high in north and southwest and southwest regions compared with other regions, and economic development was independently associated with the presence of albuminuria.

1,588 citations

Posted ContentDOI
09 Feb 2020-medRxiv
TL;DR: The 2019-nCoV epidemic spreads rapidly by human-to-human transmission and the disease severity (including oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, blood leukocyte/lymphocyte count and chest X-ray/CT manifestations) predict poor clinical outcomes.
Abstract: Background Since December 2019, acute respiratory disease (ARD) due to 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) emerged in Wuhan city and rapidly spread throughout China. We sought to delineate the clinical characteristics of these cases. Methods We extracted the data on 1,099 patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV ARD from 552 hospitals in 31 provinces/provincial municipalities through January 29th, 2020. Results The median age was 47.0 years, and 41.90% were females. Only 1.18% of patients had a direct contact with wildlife, whereas 31.30% had been to Wuhan and 71.80% had contacted with people from Wuhan. Fever (87.9%) and cough (67.7%) were the most common symptoms. Diarrhea is uncommon. The median incubation period was 3.0 days (range, 0 to 24.0 days). On admission, ground-glass opacity was the typical radiological finding on chest computed tomography (50.00%). Significantly more severe cases were diagnosed by symptoms plus reverse-transcriptase polymerase-chain-reaction without abnormal radiological findings than non-severe cases (23.87% vs. 5.20%, P Conclusions The 2019-nCoV epidemic spreads rapidly by human-to-human transmission. Normal radiologic findings are present among some patients with 2019-nCoV infection. The disease severity (including oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, blood leukocyte/lymphocyte count and chest X-ray/CT manifestations) predict poor clinical outcomes.

1,358 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: To systematically review the methodological assessment tools for pre‐clinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta‐analysis, and clinical practice guideline.
Abstract: Objective To systematically review the methodological assessment tools for pre-clinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline. Methods We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Reviewers Manual, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), and the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) up to May 20th, 2014. Two authors selected studies and extracted data; quantitative analysis was performed to summarize the characteristics of included tools. Results We included a total of 21 assessment tools for analysis. A number of tools were developed by academic organizations, and some were developed by only a small group of researchers. The JBI developed the highest number of methodological assessment tools, with CASP coming second. Tools for assessing the methodological quality of randomized controlled studies were most abundant. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias is the best available tool for assessing RCTs. For cohort and case-control studies, we recommend the use of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) is an excellent tool for assessing non-randomized interventional studies, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (ARHQ) methodology checklist is applicable for cross-sectional studies. For diagnostic accuracy test studies, the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool is recommended; the SYstematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) risk of bias tool is available for assessing animal studies; Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) is a measurement tool for systematic reviews/meta-analyses; an 18-item tool has been developed for appraising case series studies, and the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE)-II instrument is widely used to evaluate clinical practice guidelines. Conclusions We have successfully identified a variety of methodological assessment tools for different types of study design. However, further efforts in the development of critical appraisal tools are warranted since there is currently a lack of such tools for other fields, e.g. genetic studies, and some existing tools (nested case-control studies and case reports, for example) are in need of updating to be in line with current research practice and rigor. In addition, it is very important that all critical appraisal tools remain subjective and performance bias is effectively avoided.

1,241 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In a study of 105 patients with cancer and 536 without, all with confirmed COVID-19, cancer was predictive of more severe disease, with stage IV cancer, hematologic cancer, and lung cancer being associated with worse outcomes.
Abstract: The novel COVID-19 outbreak has affected more than 200 countries and territories as of March 2020. Given that patients with cancer are generally more vulnerable to infections, systematic analysis of diverse cohorts of patients with cancer affected by COVID-19 is needed. We performed a multicenter study including 105 patients with cancer and 536 age-matched noncancer patients confirmed with COVID-19. Our results showed COVID-19 patients with cancer had higher risks in all severe outcomes. Patients with hematologic cancer, lung cancer, or with metastatic cancer (stage IV) had the highest frequency of severe events. Patients with nonmetastatic cancer experienced similar frequencies of severe conditions to those observed in patients without cancer. Patients who received surgery had higher risks of having severe events, whereas patients who underwent only radiotherapy did not demonstrate significant differences in severe events when compared with patients without cancer. These findings indicate that patients with cancer appear more vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. SIGNIFICANCE: Because this is the first large cohort study on this topic, our report will provide much-needed information that will benefit patients with cancer globally. As such, we believe it is extremely important that our study be disseminated widely to alert clinicians and patients.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 747.

1,208 citations


Authors

Showing all 5659 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Yong Wang8279332763
Tao Luo6672317774
Daqing Ma6330713392
Xin Sun6372916851
Qing Li5825924788
Xueqi Cheng5857213084
Shi Chen5624812140
Jing Wang5356613571
Yingxu Chen5222010590
Satdarshan P.S. Monga5119910262
Youping Deng481918369
Yibin Feng4618411222
Ming Hu462126768
Meian He422297226
Xinghuan Wang4235325113
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Nanjing Medical University
37.9K papers, 635.8K citations

92% related

Second Military Medical University
20.4K papers, 449.4K citations

89% related

Capital Medical University
47.2K papers, 811.2K citations

89% related

Fourth Military Medical University
20.7K papers, 425.5K citations

89% related

Peking Union Medical College
61.8K papers, 1.1M citations

88% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202311
202213
2021585
2020538
2019439
2018310