Sinonasal manifestations and dynamic profile of RT-PCR results for SARS-CoV-2 in COVID-19 patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sinonasal symptoms were usually reported to appear initially, yielding the symptoms important for the early detection of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study was conducted retrospectively to investigate the detailed sinonasal manifestations and dynamic profile of real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in COVID-19 patients longitudinally. METHODS: This retrospective study included 11 consecutive patients. The prevalence, timing and severity of sinonasal manifestations were analyzed. Oropharyngeal, nasal, sputum and stool specimens were collected to detect RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 over COVID-19 period. RESULTS: Among the 11 patients, 6 (54.5%) were female, and the median age was 51 (IQR, 36-62) years. Seven patients (63.6%) experienced sinonasal symptoms, with 6 (54.5%) exhibiting sinonasal symptoms on the onset day. Seven patients (63.6%) demonstrated nasal obstruction, 5 (45.5%) had rhinorrhea, and 4 (36.4%) exhibited olfactory dysfunction. All six patients with sinonasal symptoms on the onset day had non-severe infections. Most patients (85.7%) with sinonasal symptoms had non-severe infections. Sinonasal symptoms commonly appeared early. The positive RT-PCR rate for SARS-CoV-2 in various specimens was highest in the first week (73.3%), then gradually decreased over the disease course, but 3 patients (27.3%) had experienced a long-lasting fluctuated positive RT-PCR results since 29 days of illness in both groups, especially for two patients with airway comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Sinonasal symptoms were more prevalent in patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 and usually appeared early. In addition, regular nucleic acid testing for SARS-CoV-2 should be considered for COVID-19 patients with certain airway comorbidities.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".