Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
Am J Med Sci ; 364(1): 7-15, 2022 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34986364

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) continues to lead to worldwide morbidity and mortality. This study examined the association between blood type and clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 measured by a calculated morbidity score and mortality rates. The secondary aim was to investigate the relationship between patient characteristics and COVID-19 associated clinical outcomes and mortality. METHODS: Logistic regression was used to determine what factors were associated with death. A total morbidity score was constructed based on overall patient's COVID-19 clinical course. This score was modeled using Quasi-Poisson regression. Bayesian variable selection was used for the logistic regression to obtain a posterior probability that blood type is important in predicting worsened clinical outcomes and death. RESULTS: Neither blood type nor Rh+ status was a significant moderator of death or morbidity score in regression analyses. Increased age (adjusted Odds Ratio=3.37, 95% CI=2.44-4.67), male gender (aOR=1.35, 95% CI=1.08-1.69), and number of comorbid conditions (aOR=1.28, 95% CI=1.01-1.63) were significantly associated with death. Significant factors in predicting total morbidity score were age (adjusted Multiplicative Effect=1.45; 95% CI=1.349-1.555) and gender (aME=1.17; 95% CI=1.109-1.243). The posterior probability that blood type influenced death was only 10%. CONCLUSIONS: There is strong evidence that blood type was not a significant predictor of clinical course or death in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Older age and male gender led to worse clinical outcomes and higher rates of death; older age, male gender, and comorbidities predicted a worse clinical course and higher morbidity score. Race was not a significant predictor of death in our population and was associated with an increased, albeit not significant, morbidity score.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Teorema de Bayes , Comorbidade , Hospitalização , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Am J Med Sci ; 360(5): 489-510, 2020 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32912601

RESUMO

Breast and gynecological cancers affect almost 900,000 women and therefore most health care providers will be involved at some point in the management of women with cancer. As the prognosis of all cancers is much more favorable when diagnosed in early stages, it is imperative that all health care providers are familiar not only with current screening guidelines for the average population, but also with the identification of high risk individuals who may benefit from more intense screening as well as available interventions to prevent disease or decrease risk. The purpose of this review article is to provide relevant information to physicians and other health care providers to aid in identifying patients that are classified as "high risk" for developing breast or a gynecologic cancer, outlining what interventions exist for adequate screening and risk reduction strategies, and to provide an update on current screening guidelines for individuals at average and high risk.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Mama/prevenção & controle , Neoplasias Ovarianas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Ovarianas/prevenção & controle , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/diagnóstico , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/prevenção & controle , Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Feminino , Predisposição Genética para Doença/genética , Predisposição Genética para Doença/prevenção & controle , Terapia de Reposição Hormonal/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Fatores de Risco , Fumar/efeitos adversos , Fumar/genética , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/genética
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA