Covid-19: A systemic disease treated with a wide-ranging approach: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the end of December 2019, the Health Commission of the city of Wuhan, China, alerted the World Health Organization (WHO) to a pneumonia cluster in the city. The cause was identified as being a new virus, later named SARS-CoV-2. We can distinguish three clinical phases of the disease with a distinct pathogenesis, manifestations and prognosis. Here, we describe the case of a 45-year-old male, successfully treated for Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The patient was feeling sick in early April 2020; he had a fever and pharyngodynia. When he came to our COVID hospital, his breathing was normal. The nasopharyngeal swab specimen turned out positive. High-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) showed mild interstitial pneumonia. The patient was admitted to our department and treated with hydroxychloroquine, ritonavir, darunavir, azithromycin and enoxaparin. On day seven of the disease, the patient's respiratory condition got worse as he was developing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). He was given tocilizumab and corticosteroids and was immediately treated with non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV). His condition improved, and in the ensuing days, the treatment gradually switched to a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC); after 18 days, the patient's clinical condition was good.The successful results we have been able to obtain are closely associated with avoidance of invasive ventilation that may lead to intensive care unit (ICU)-related superinfections. In our opinion, it is fundamental to understand that COVID-19 is a systemic disease that is a consequence of an overwhelming inflammatory response, which can cause severe medical conditions, even in young patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".