Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is caused by a novel coronavirus. It may progress to respiratory failure, and a significant proportion of patients die. Preliminary data suggest that a high viral load of the SARS coronavirus is associated with adverse outcomes in the intensive care unit, but the relation of viral load to survival is unclear. METHODS: We prospectively studied an inception cohort of 133 patients with virologically confirmed SARS who were admitted to 2 general acute care hospitals in Hong Kong from Mar. 24 to May 4, 2003. The patients were followed until death or for a minimum of 90 days. We used Cox proportional hazard modelling to analyze potential predictors of survival recorded at the time of presentation, including viral load from nasopharyngeal specimens (measured by quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction [PCR] of the SARS-associated coronavirus). RESULTS: Thirty-two patients (24.1%) met the criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome, and 24 patients (18.0%) died. The following baseline factors were independently associated with worse survival: older age (61-80 years) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 5.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.03-13.53), presence of an active comorbid condition (adjusted HR 3.36, 95% CI 1.44-7.82) and higher initial viral load of SARS coronavirus, according to quantitative PCR of nasopharyngeal specimens (adjusted HR 1.21 per log10 increase in number of RNA copies per millilitre, 95% CI 1.06-1.39). INTERPRETATION: We found preliminary evidence that higher initial viral load is independently associated with worse prognosis in SARS. Mortality data for patients with SARS should be interpreted in light of age, comorbidity and viral load. These considerations will be important in future studies of SARS.
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 | 0.003 | 0.112 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".