MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013177429 · doi:10.1101/2020.03.26.20043042

Analysis and Prediction of COVID-19 Patients’ False Negative Results for SARS-CoV-2 Detection with Pharyngeal Swab Specimen: A Retrospective Study

2020· preprint· en· W3013177429 on OpenAlexafffund
Hui Xu, Yan Li, Chun Qiu, Bo Jiao, Yanyan Chen, Xi Tan, Zhuo Chen, Ling Ai, Yaru Xiao, Ailin Luo, Shusheng Li

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersTongji UniversityHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyTongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and TechnologyWilfrid Laurier University
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionRetrospective cohort studyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Multivariate statisticsMultivariate analysisFalse Negative ReactionsCohortCohort studyInternal medicineStatisticsInfectious disease (medical specialty)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background False negative results of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection pose threats to COVID-19 patients and medical workers alike. Objective To develop multivariate models to determine clinical characteristics that contribute to false negative results of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection, and use them to predict false negative results as well as time windows for testing positive. Design Retrospective Cohort Study (Ethics number of Tongji Hospital: No. IRBID: TJ-20200320) Setting A database of outpatients in Tongji Hospital (University Hospital) from 15 January 2020 to 19 February 2020. Patients 1,324 outpatients with COVID-19 Measurements Clinical information on CT imaging reports, blood routine tests, and clinic symptoms were collected. A multivariate logistic regression was used to explain and predict false negative testing results of SARS-CoV-2 detection. A multivariate accelerated failure model was used to analyze and predict delayed time windows for testing positive. Results Of the 1,324 outpatients who diagnosed of COVID-19, 633 patients tested positive in their first SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test (47.8%), with a mean age of 51 years (SD=14.9); the rest, which had a mean age of 47 years (SD=15.4), tested negative in the first test. “Ground glass opacity” in a CT imaging report was associated with a lower chance of false negatives (aOR, 0.56), and reduced the length of time window for testing positive by 26%. “Consolidation” was associated with a higher chance of false negatives (aOR, 1.57), and extended the length of time window for testing positive by 44%. In blood routine tests, basophils (aOR, 1.28) and eosinophils (aOR, 1.29) were associated with a higher chance of false negatives, and were found to extend the time window for testing positive by 23% and 41%, respectively. Age and gender also affected the significantly. Limitation Data were generated in a large single-center study. Conclusion Testing outcome and positive window of SARS-CoV-2 detection for COVID-19 patients were associated with CT imaging results, blood routine tests, and clinical symptoms. Taking into account relevant information in CT imaging reports, blood routine tests, and clinical symptoms helped reduce a false negative testing outcome. The predictive AFT model, what we believe to be one of the first statistical models for predicting time window of SARS-CoV-2 detection, could help clinicians improve the accuracy and efficiency of the diagnosis, and hence, optimizes the timing of nucleic acid detection and alleviates the shortage of nucleic acid detection kits around the world. Primary Funding Source None.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207